Insights

Analysis from the front lines of IP & technology law.

Our attorneys write about the developments shaping intellectual property — from the PTAB and the Federal Circuit to the practical realities of protecting fast-moving technology.

Showing 397–408 of 1287
Intellectual PropertyTrademark

The Evolution of Trade Dress Protection for Product Design and Configuration: A Comprehensive Case Law Analysis

This article is the deep case-law spine of mclaw.io's trade dress coverage. It traces the doctrine for product design and configuration through the four foundational Supreme Court decisions decided between 1992 and 2001—Two Pesos v. Taco Cabana, Qualitex v. Jacobson, Wal-Mart v. Samara, and TrafFix v. Marketing Displays—and the circuit law that has applied them. Written for judges, practitioners, and business readers alike, it explains the outcome-determining line between product packaging (which can be inherently distinctive) and product design (which can never be, and always demands secondary meaning), along with the elusive "tertium quid" middle category. It works through utilitarian functionality under Inwood, the Morton-Norwich evidentiary factors, aesthetic functionality under Qualitex, and the way TrafFix demoted alternative-design evidence and elevated expired utility patents. It surveys how the circuits have handled footwear, multi-tools, snack food, restaurant decor, beverage bottles, and smartphones, pays close attention to who bears the burden of proving (non)functionality and to the expert and survey evidence that decides close cases, and closes with worked hypotheticals, industry-by-industry guidance, a comparative look at trade dress abroad and at emerging pressures from AR, 3D printing, and AI, and a practical FAQ. The throughline is the law's enduring effort to balance brand identity against the public's right to copy unpatented, functional features.

Casey Scott McKayMay 22, 202653 min read