Mainstreaming Trade Press Law: The Rise and Fall of Secondary Meaning


This Article attempts to answer these questions and argues that in view of the common underlying policies of trade dress and trademark law, and in the interest of mainstreaming trade dress law into that of trademark law, proof of secondary meaning should not be required where a trade dress is found to be inherently distinctive. Further, this Article takes the position that despite a finding of no secondary meaning, a trade dress may nevertheless assume inherently distinctive status. Indeed, the mainstreaming of trade dress law may foment the competitive process and lead to more consistent and equitable holdings by the courts as well as more predictable results for trade dress owners.


Copyright, Dress Law, Secondary Meaning

Publication Date


Document Type


Place of Original Publication

Detroit College of Law Review

Publication Information

1993 Detroit College of Law Review 37 (1993)

This document is currently not available here.


COinS Craig Allen Nard Faculty Bio