Abstract
The dispute between Luka Dončić and his mother over his ability to withdraw consent to a trademark of his name revealed a gap in trademark law. This Comment explains the lack of legal guidance on how a court should rule if a person initially gives their consent to use their name as a trademark but later wishes to withdraw that consent. The Comment addresses two contrasting ideas. The first is the freedom to contract and the desire of courts to protect the voluntary consent of individuals to allow others to trademark their name. Alternatively, the Comment addresses the right of publicity as a tool for public figures to protect their names and, ultimately, their livelihoods. With both in mind, the Comment proposes adopting a balancing test currently accepted by the Supreme Court to decide whether an injunction should be granted in patent infringement cases. By weighing factors like public policy and the hardships on both parties, the Comment seeks to address the unanswered question presented by the unique contract between an NBA player and his mother.
Repository Citation
Zachary R. Semancik, Withdrawing Lanham Act Section 2(c) Consent: What Should the Courts Do? , 28 Marq. Intell. Prop. & Innovation L. Rev. 91 (2024).