Law Ethics and Corporate Governance
By Steven Horn
Professor Lynn E. Macbeth, J.D
March 13, 2010
1. Explain whether or not the fact that Gabby’s surname is Rally gives her the right to use it any way she wishes.
The fact that Gabby’s name is Rally does not give her the right to use Rally in her business. The Lanham Trademark act and the Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 protect a company’s ownership rights to names, logo, or symbols that identify its products. In this case, Rally was identified by cars, now the name is also being identified for making pizza making it harder to distinguish between the two businesses. Rally Motors has a right to prevent other companies from using the Rally name. Like Herman stated in the video, if he did allow the pizza company to use the name Rally, what would prevent another car company from using the Rally name which would give the company real competition because they are selling the same product. Using the name Rally for Gabby’s Pizzeria is an example of Infringement of the trademark law. The part of trademark law that talks about infringement states a company must show that the competitors mark is likely to confuse consumers about the source of a product, or suggest that the trademark’s owner made an endorsement it didn’t make. In this scenario, the fact that people were actually calling Rally Motors asking if they sold pizza clearly shows the confusing for consumers and solidifying the infringement rule.
2. Explain whether or not it matters that Rally is associated with pizza.
In my opinion, the answer to this question can go either way, but I will say yes. You have to think about the effects of Rally Pizza and how it affects Rally Motors. If somebody gets a bad pizza from Gabby’s shop, are they going to say I am not going to get a car from Rally Motors, no because viewers will not be confused with eating a pizza and buying a car. I do believe that Gabby’s pizza...