The affirmative case argues that the United States Supreme Court should significantly strengthen its protection of domestic intellectual property rights in trademarks by implementing a consistent confusion-based multifactor trademark test and enforcing penalties as found in Central Manufacturing, Inc. v. Brett. This plan aims to reduce trademark trolling, which is the practice of registering trademarks with no intent to use them in order to charge licensing fees or threaten litigation against others using similar marks.
The first advantage contends that trademark trolling devastates small businesses, which are key to the U.S. economy. Trademark trolls often target small businesses that lack the legal resources to fight back against frivolous infringement claims. This forces many small businesses to settle or stop using their trademarks, harming competition and innovation. Implementing a clear, uniform trademark test would reduce uncertainty and meritless lawsuits by trolls. Small businesses account for 44% of U.S. economic activity and create two-thirds of new jobs[1]. However, the current trademark system allows trolls to bully them with litigation threats they can’t afford to fight. Economic decline resulting from damage to small businesses risks global war, as studies show macroeconomic shocks can lead to increased conflict. A negative terms of trade shock equivalent to 1% of GDP increases conflict events by 0.05 per million people, which is twice as large an effect for low-income countries.
The second advantage argues that trademark trolling kills startup companies. The current system allows trolls to succeed due to legal uncertainty. Startups often cannot afford to fight back against trolling litigation and are forced out of business before they can get off the ground. Startups are vital for long-term U.S. economic viability and growth. The startup boom of the 1990s led to major productivity gains, but productivity has been anemic in recent years despite the current startup boom, in part because of trolling. Losing the innovation battle to China through the death of startups could lead to World War III, as China seeks to use its innovation prowess to achieve economic and military dominance over the U.S. China’s tactics include weakening the U.S. innovation infrastructure through trademark trolling. U.S. economic strength underpinned by robust intellectual property is key to avoiding great power war.
In summary, the affirmative claims the Supreme Court plan would clamp down on trademark trolling, protecting small businesses and startups that are critical engines of the U.S. economy. Failure to act risks economic decline and losing the innovation race to China, both of which could result in great power war. A strong, growing U.S. economy supported by a robust intellectual property system is key to preserving peace and American global leadership.
Citations:
[1] https://ppl-ai-file-upload.s3.amazonaws.com/web/direct-files/1168016/09c353bf-e18c-42f6-aedb-e687d5eb41f8/Reduce-Patent-Trolling.pdf