United States: Justice Scalia On Trademark And Copyright: Dastar, Penguin-Shaped Cocktail Shakers And "Guilt By Resemblance"

Last Updated: March 9 2016
Article by David A. Kluft

When we decided to mark the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia by recounting a few of his copyright and trademark opinions, we were somewhat surprised to discover that there really hadn't been that many. In fact, we located only seven matters in which Justice Scalia contributed a written opinion on a substantive issue of trademark or copyright law, and only four were majority opinions. Here they are, in chronological order:

K Mart Corp. v. Cartier, 486 U.S. 281 (1988)

In 1922, the United States began regulating the importation of gray-market goods, that is, foreign-manufactured goods bearing a valid U.S. trademark that are imported into the U.S. without consent of the U.S. trademark holder. Section 526 of the Tariff Act prohibited gray-market imports, but the implementing regulations provided for various "common control" exceptions, which allowed the importation of goods manufactured abroad by affiliates of the trademark holder. In 1984, an association of U.S. trademark holders challenged these regulatory exceptions as invalid and inconsistent with the broad prohibition set forth in the statute. In a deeply wonky opinion complex enough to merit its own Lonely Planet guide, Justice Kennedy cobbled together a majority and held that most of the exceptions were a permissible interpretation of the statute. Justice Scalia, then in his second term on the Court, disagreed and dissented, arguing that the regulations contradicted the statute. "The authority to clarify an ambiguity in a statute," Justice Scalia wrote, "is not the authority to alter [] its unambiguous applications, and [Section 526] unambiguously encompasses most of the situations that the regulation purports to exclude."

Feltner v. Columbia Pictures, 523 U.S. 340 (1998)

Several broadcast television stations continued airing masterpieces such as Who's the Boss, Silver Spoons and T.J. Hooker even after they had stopped paying royalties, leading to a fairly slam dunk copyright claim by Columbia Pictures. Columbia prevailed on summary judgment and exercised its option under Section 504 of the Copyright Act to collect statutory damages (in lieu of actual damages), which were supposed to be measured by what "the court considers just." The stations demanded a jury trial on what the amount of statutory damages should be, but the District Court and Ninth Circuit refused. Justice Thomas, writing for the Court, reversed. Although the text of Section 504 afforded no jury right, the Court held that the Seventh Amendment nevertheless required it. Justice Scalia, in concurrence, felt that this constitutional issue should have been avoided altogether, because there was a "fairly possible" reading of Section 504 that did in fact provide for a jury trial right. Justice Scalia noted that, according to certain dictionaries, the word "court" was not necessarily limited to a judge, but could also mean anyone duly assigned to administer justice, including a jury.

College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid, 527 U.S. 666 (1999)

Justice Scalia authored his first majority opinion on a trademark or copyright issue nearly a dozen years into his tenure. College Savings, a private bank engaged in the business of education financing, had brought suit against Florida Prepaid, an arm of the Florida government that offered competing services. College Savings claimed that Florida Prepaid made false claims about its own services in violation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. Florida Prepaid asserted that it was protected by sovereign immunity, but College Savings argued that Florida's sovereign immunity was expressly abrogated by the 1992 Trademark Remedy Clarification Act (TRCA). Justice Scalia, writing for a slim 5-4 majority, held that the Eleventh Amendment did not give Congress the authority to abrogate state sovereign immunity. Moreover, although the Fourteenth Amendment did give Congress this authority, such authority was limited to situations involving the deprivation of property without due process. Here, however, Justice Scalia held that the relevant false advertising provisions of the Lanham Act's did not invoke "property" rights, because a claim that a competitor lied about its own product does not involve the "right to exclude others." Justice Breyer dissented, joined by Justices Stevens, Souter and Ginsberg.

Wal-Mart Stores v. Samara Bros., 529 U.S. 205 (2000)

Clothing designer Samara brought Lanham Act and copyright infringement counts against Wal-Mart, alleging that the retailer was selling knock-offs of its children's apparel. Samara asserted that its clothing designs were protectable as inherently distinctive trade dress for purposes of Section 43(a). The Second Circuit upheld a jury verdict in favor of Samara, but a unanimous Supreme Court reversed, in an opinion authored by Justice Scalia. The Court held that, in an action for unregistered trade dress infringement, the plaintiff was required to prove secondary meaning in order to establish distinctiveness. The Court also held that product design, like color, cannot be inherently distinctive. Justice Scalia wrote "that product design almost invariably serves purposes other than source identification," and therefore "[c]onsumers are aware of the reality that, almost invariably, even the most unusual of product designs — such as a cocktail shaker shaped like a penguin — is intended not to identify the source, but to render the product itself more useful or more appealing."

Dastar v. Twentieth Century Fox, 539 U.S. 23 (2003)

Probably the most important copyright or trademark decision by Justice Scalia involved a World War II documentary series called Crusade in Europe. Twentieth Century Fox owned the rights to the series, but for some reason let the copyright expire. Dastar took full advantage of the public domain status of the program by purchasing a copy, editing it down to about half its length, and then selling copies of this shortened derivative work under the DASTAR mark. Twentieth Century Fox, unable to rely on copyright law, turned to the Lanham Act, claiming that Dastar was engaged in reverse passing off under Section 43(a), because it was misrepresenting the "origin" of the product.  But Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, disagreed and held that the "origin" of a product for trademark purposes meant the origin of the object consumers are purchasing, not the author or inventor whose ideas led to the product's creation. Justice Scalia used Coke and Pepsi as examples: the Lanham Act protects a consumer's right to know that the bottle of Coke he or she is purchasing isn't really a Pepsi, but it doesn't protect a consumer's right to know the name of the individuals who invented Coke or Pepsi. Dastar effectively ended the use of Section 43(a) as remedy to correct the improper attribution of authorship in scholarly and creative work; in fact, some argue that Justice Scalia's opinion effectively caused that the United States to fall out of compliance with the Berne Convention.

Lexmark International v. Static Control Components, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1377 (2014)

Lexmark, the manufacturer of printers and printer cartridges, allegedly made false statements about Static Control, the maker of a chip that facilitated the recycling and reuse of Lexmark's cartridges. Static Control brought a claim for false advertising, but the District Court, noting that the parties were not direct competitors, dismissed the case for lack of standing.  The Sixth Circuit reversed and Lexmark appealed. Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Scalia agreed that Static Control had standing, because it fell within the "zone of interests" protected by the Lanham Act; that is, although not a direct competitor, Static Control had adequately alleged that certain commercial speech by Lexmark was likely to cause it lost sales or harm to its business reputation.

ABC, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2498 (2014)

Aereo offered a service that allowed viewers to watch broadcast television programs over the internet through the remote control use of tiny dime-sized antennae that serviced only one viewer at a time. The Supreme Court held that Aereo's service infringed the broadcasters' exclusive right to publicly perform their work. Justice Scalia, in his last published opinion on a copyright or trademark issue, dissented on the grounds that what Aereo did was not a performance by Aereo at all; rather, the viewers were the ones "calling all the shots" by directing the antennae to transmit infringing programs.  Justice Scalia further argued that the majority opinion imposed on Aereo "guilt by resemblance," holding it liable for copyright infringement not so much because it violated the text of the Copyright Act, but because it resembled past technologies that were found to have done so. Justice Scalia perhaps summed up a large chunk of his judicial oeuvre with the concluding exhortation: "the proper course is not to bend and twist the Act's terms in an effort to produce a just outcome, but to apply the law as it stands and leave to Congress the task of deciding whether the Copyright Act needs an upgrade."

To view Foley Hoag's Trademark and Copyright Law Blog please click here

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
25 Oct 2017, Webinar, Boston, United States

Foley Hoag will present a 60-minute webinar on Wednesday, October 25 at 12:30 pm EDT, offering guidance for in-house counsel regarding the basics of trademark and design protection in the European Union. Attendees will learn about the opportunities and pitfalls to be on the lookout for when looking to secure, protect, and enforce an IP portfolio overseas.

1 Nov 2017, Webinar, Boston, United States

Please join Foley Hoag on Wednesday, November 1, 2017 for a webinar that covers the details of drafting an appropriate arbitration clause for your company’s commercial contracts.

9 Nov 2017, Conference, Waltham, United States

Please join us on Thursday, November 9 at the Westin Waltham Hotel for our quarterly New England M&A Forum, which brings the latest in market trends and recent legal developments to the New England M&A professionals' community.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.