Protection of trademarks against delution: a semiotic perspective

Author information:

Katya Assaf Zakharov
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem Jerusalem, Israel

Published: 23.03.2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.69724/2786-8834-2026-8-1-25-51

Keywords: cultural significance of trademarks, legal protection of trademarks, identification of the origin of goods and services, marketing and branding, the US legal system

Download PDF
Обкладинка. 8-й випуск

Abstract

This article deals with the cultural meaning of trademarks and the social significance of its legal protection. It focuses on the US legal system. Trademarks are symbols designed to enable the consumer to identify without confusion the source of various goods and services. Today, however, trademarks are much more than source identifiers. They are culturally meaningful signs. Thus, for example, the trademark “Coca-Cola,” in addition to conveying information about the origin of soft drinks, is associated with freedom, youth, joy and globalization. The trademark “Chanel” stands not only for fragrances and apparel, but also for exclusivity, intelligence and European chic. The cultural meaning of the Olympic rings and Mickey Mouse, both registered trademarks, can hardly be gasped in a few words. Famous trademarks embed values, visions and ideals we believe in. As cultural signs, they occupy a rather central place in our society. The cultural meaning of a trademark is carefully built up by its owner by means of advertising and other marketing techniques. These techniques create associative links between the trademark and various positive cultural signs such as freedom, youth, intelligence, etc. This article argues that these links are reciprocal. That is, while the trademark begins to carry some of the meaning of the cultural signs it has been linked to, these cultural signs also absorb some of the commercial flavor of the mark.

How to Cite

In accordance with DSTU 8302:2015:
Assaf Zakharov K. Protection of trademarks against delution: a semiotic perspective. Цивілістична платформа. 2026. № 1 (8). С. 25-51. https://doi.org/10.69724/2786-8834-2026-8-1-25-51

According to the international style of APA:
Assaf Zakharov, K. (2026) Protection of trademarks against delution: a semiotic perspective. С. P. Journal, 1 (8). https://doi.org/10.69724/2786-8834-2026-8-1-25-51 [in English].

References

  1. Alexander, M. J., & Heilbronner, M. K. (1996). Dilution under section 43(c) of the Lanham Act. Law and Contemporary Problems, 59, 93–124.
  2. American Computer Trust Leasing v. Jack Farrell Implement Co., 763 F. Supp. 1473 (D. Minn. 1991).
  3. Andras, T. L., & Srinivasan, S. (2003). Advertising intensity and R&D intensity. International Journal of Business and Economics, 2, 167–180.
  4. Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Balducci Publications, 28 F.3d 769 (8th Cir. 1994).
  5. Bacardi & Co. v. Bacardi Manufacturing Jewelers Co., 174 U.S.P.Q. 284 (N.D. Ill. 1972).
  6. Bone, R. G. (2007). A skeptical view of the Trademark Dilution Revision Act. Intellectual Property Law Bulletin, 11, 187–191.
  7. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Harvard University Press.
  8. Bourdieu, P. (2001). Masculine domination. Stanford University Press.
  9. (2002). BGH 3 StR 495/01.
  10. (2007). BGH 3 StR 481/06.
  11. Burkhalter, J., & Curasi, C. (2017). Music and its multitude of meanings. Journal of Brand Management, 24, 213–226.
  12. Chemical Corp. of America v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 306 F.2d 433 (5th Cir. 1962).
  13. Coca-Cola Co. v. Gemini Rising, Inc., 346 F. Supp. 1183 (E.D.N.Y. 1972).
  14. Cohen, F. (1935). Transcendental nonsense and the functional approach. Columbia Law Review, 35, 809–849.
  15. Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders, Inc. v. Pussycat Cinema Ltd., 467 F. Supp. 366 (S.D.N.Y. 1979).
  16. Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders, Inc. v. Pussycat Cinema Ltd., 604 F.2d 200 (2d Cir. 1979).
  17. Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders, Inc. v. Scoreboard Posters, Inc., 600 F.2d 1184 (5th Cir. 1979).
  18. Delflache, M. L., Silbert, S., & Hillson, C. (2007). Life after Moseley. Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal, 16, 125–142.
  19. Denicola, R. C. (1996). Federal trademark legislation. Law and Contemporary Problems, 59, 75–90.
  20. Denicola, R. C. (1999). Freedom to copy. Yale Law Journal, 108, 1661–1670.
  21. Dopson, N. A. (1998). The Federal Trademark Dilution Act and its effect on parody. Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 5, 539–566.
  22. Nelson, R. S. (2002). Tarnishment and unfair competition. IDEA, 42, 133–160.
  23. Zando-Dennis, J. (2005). Not playing around. Cardozo Women’s Law Journal, 11, 599–626.
  24. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. Penguin Books USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997).
  25. Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330 (1972).
  26. Kusper v. Pontikes, 414 U.S. 51 (1973).
  27. Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 U.S. 765 (2002).
  28. Eco, U. (1976). A theory of semiotics. Indiana University Press.
  29. Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. v. High Society Magazine, Inc., 7 Media L. Rep. 1862 (S.D.N.Y. 1981).
  30. Etzioni, A. (1987). How rational we? Sociological Forum, 2(1), 1–10.
  31. Fireman’s Association of the State of New York v. French American School of New York, 2007 WL 1628372.
  32. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). Happiness and well-being: How the economy and institutions affect happiness. Princeton University Press.
  33. Fromm, E. (1955). The sane society. Rinehart.
  34. General Electric Co. v. Alumpa Coal Co., 205 U.S.P.Q. 1036 (D. Mass. 1979).
  35. Gerhardt, D. R. (2007). The 2006 Trademark Dilution Revision Act rolls out a luxury claim and a parody exemption. North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology, 8, 205–227.
  36. Gibson, J. (2007). Risk aversion and rights accretion in intellectual property law. Yale Law Journal, 116, 882–951.
  37. Gillespie, B., et al. (2018). Fitting product placements: Affective fit and cognitive fit as drivers of consumer evaluations of brand placements. Journal of Business Research, 35, 1–10.
  38. GTFM LLC v. Universal Studios Inc., 2006 WL 1377048 (S.D.N.Y. 2006).
  39. Hebrew University of Jerusalem. (n.d.). Faculty of Law.
  40. Hirsch, D. D. (2006). Protecting the inner environment: What privacy regulation can learn from environmental law. Georgia Law Review, 41, 1–45.
  41. Huh, J., & Kim, H. (2020). Native advertising in online news. Journal of Promotion Management, 29, 1–20.
  42. Interbank Card Association v. Simms, 431 F. Supp. 131 (M.D.N.C. 1977).
  43. Jacoby, J. (2001). The psychological foundations of trademark law. Trademark Reporter, 91, 1013–1078.
  44. Kasky v. Nike, 27 Cal.4th 939 (Cal. 2002).
  45. Kasser, T. (2002). The high price of materialism. MIT Press.
  46. Kelly, M. (2001). The divine right of capital: Dethroning the corporate aristocracy. Berrett-Koehler.
  47. Klieger, R. N. (1997). Trademark dilution: The whittling away of the rational basis for trademark protection. University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 58, 789–846.
  48. L. Bean, Inc. v. Drake Publishers, Inc., 811 F.2d 26 (1st Cir. 1987).
  49. Landgericht Stuttgart. (2006). LG Stuttgart 18 KLs 4 Js 63331/05.
  50. Lehman v. City of Shaker Heights, 418 U.S. 298 (1974).
  51. Lemley, M. A. (1999). The modern Lanham Act and the death of common sense. Yale Law Journal, 108, 1687–1715.
  52. LightHawk v. Robertson, 812 F. Supp. 1095 (W.D. Wash. 1993).
  53. Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 464 F. Supp. 2d 495 (E.D. Va. 2006).
  54. Lury, C. (2004). Brands: The logos of the global economy. Routledge.
    Allen, C. N. (1941). A psychology of motivation for advertisers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 25, 378–383.
  55. Marx, K. (1976). Capital (Vol. 1). Penguin Books.
  56. Mattel Inc. v. MCA Records, Inc., 28 F. Supp. 2d 1120 (C.D. Cal. 1998).
  57. Mattel Inc. v. Walking Mountain Productions, 353 F.3d 792 (9th Cir. 2003).
  58. McAllister, M. P. (1996). The commercialization of American culture. Sage.
  59. Bagdikian, B. H. (1983). The media monopoly. Beacon Press.
  60. Baker, E. (1992). Advertising and a democratic press. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 140, 2097–2139.
  61. McAllister, M. P. (1997). Sponsorship, globalization and the Summer Olympics. In K. T. Frith (Ed.), Undressing the ad (pp. 35–43). Peter Lang.
  62. McCarthy, J. T. (2025). McCarthy on trademarks and unfair competition (5th ed.). Thomson Reuters.
  63. Meunier, V. (2006). Theory of industrial organization. http://www.econ.au.dk/fag/2157/e06/Notes/Intro_Chap1.pdf
  64. Mick, D. G. (1986). Consumer research and semiotics: Exploring the morphology of signs, symbols, and significance. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(2), 196–213.
  65. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co. v. Novak, 836 F.2d 397 (8th Cir. 1987).
  66. Newton, I. (1687/1999). Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica.
  67. Original Appalachian Artworks, Inc. v. Topps Chewing Gum, 642 F. Supp. 1031 (N.D. Ga. 1986).
  68. Petty, R. D. (2004). Of tartans and trademarks. Trademark Reporter, 94, 859–876.
  69. Posner, R. A. (1986). Economic analysis of law (3rd ed.). Little, Brown.
  70. Polinsky, A. M. (1989). An introduction to law and economics (2nd ed.). Little, Brown.
  71. Quillian, M. R. (1968). Semantic memory. In M. Minsky (Ed.), Semantic information processing (pp. 227–270). MIT Press.
  72. Reddy Communications, Inc. v. Environmental Action Foundation, 199 U.S.P.Q. 630 (D.D.C. 1977).
  73. Ringling Bros.–Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. Celozzi-Ettelson Chevrolet, Inc., 855 F.2d 480 (7th Cir. 1988).
  74. Rogers v. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d 994 (2d Cir. 1989).
  75. Russell, C. A., & Stern, B. B. (2016). The effects of product placement in fictitious literature on consumer choice. Psychology & Marketing, 33, 985–1001.
  76. San Francisco Arts & Athletics v. International Olympic Committee, 483 U.S. 522 (1987).
  77. Schechter, F. (1927). The rational basis of trademark protection. Harvard Law Review, 40, 813–833.
  78. Singer, J. W. (1988). Legal realism now. California Law Review, 76, 465–544.
  79. Stuckey, K. D., et al. (2008). Internet and online law. Thomson Reuters.
  80. Supreme Court of the United States. (2003). 123 S. Ct. 1115.
  81. Tiffany & Co. v. Boston Club, Inc., 231 F. Supp. 836 (D. Mass. 1964).
  82. Tiffany & Co. v. Classic Motor Carriages, Inc., 10 U.S.P.Q.2d 1835 (T.T.A.B. 1989).
  83. Tiffany & Co. v. Tiffany Productions, 264 N.Y.S. 459 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1932).
  84. Toyota Motor Corp. v. Natural Health Trends Corp., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10442 (C.D. Cal. 2005).
  85. S. Const.
  86. United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co., 248 U.S. 90 (1918).
  87. Union National Bank v. Union National Bank, 909 F.2d 839 (5th Cir. 1990).
  88. Keebler Co. v. Rovira Biscuit Corp., 624 F.2d 366 (1st Cir. 1980).
  89. United States District Court for the District of Utah. (2007). 505 F. Supp. 2d 1161.
  90. Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Casey & Casey, Inc., 622 F. Supp. 201 (S.D. Fla. 1985).
  91. Universal City Studios, Inc. v. T-Shirt Gallery, Ltd., 634 F. Supp. 1468 (S.D.N.Y. 1986).
  92. Valenzuela, A. I., Wojdynski, B. J., & Evans, N. J. (2022). Disclosure of sponsored content: Examining the role of brand prominence and persuasion knowledge in native advertising. Psychology & Marketing, 39, 2261–2278.
  93. Walt Disney Co. v. Powell, 698 F. Supp. 10 (D.D.C. 1988).
  94. Wernick, A. (1991). Promotional culture: Advertising, ideology, and symbolic expression. Sage.
  95. WHS Entertainment Ventures v. United Paperworkers International Union, 997 F. Supp. 946 (M.D. Tenn. 1998).
  96. Yankee Publishing Inc. v. News America Publishing, Inc., 809 F. Supp. 267 (S.D.N.Y. 1992).
    Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994).
  97. Zakharov, K. (2003). The right of publicity. GRUR International, 118–126.
© Civil Platform. All rights reserved. 2026