About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


18 Seattle U. L. Rev. 259 (1994-1995)
Unconstitutional Incontestability - The Intersection of the Intellectual Property and Commerce Clauses of the Constitution: Beyond a Critique of Shakespeare Co. v. Silstar Corp.

handle is hein.journals/sealr18 and id is 269 raw text is: Unconstitutional Incontestability? The Intersection of the Intellectual Property and Commerce Clauses of the Constitution: Beyond A Critique of Shakespeare Co. v. Silstar Corp. Malla Pollack* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ................................. 260 II. The Triggering Case: Shakespeare v. Silstar ........ 261 III. Background Statutory and Common Law ........... 262 A. Mere Descriptiveness ...................... 263 B. Functionality .. .......................... 264 C. Incontestably-Registered Trademarks .......... 266 IV. Congress May Not By Pass the Limited Times Provision in the Intellectual Property Clause Through the Commerce Clause . ....................... 270 A. Other Clauses as Limits on the Commerce Clause 270 B. The Meaning of Limited Times in the Intellectual Property Clause ................. 274 C. Intellectual Property Clause Limits on the Commerce Clause ......................... 288 1. Equivalent Rights-A Thesis ............. 289 2. Court Statements . ..................... 297 3. Congress' Actions .................... 298 V. Constitutional Limits On The States? Suggesting Constitutional/Statutory Preemption ............. 300 VI. Conclusion .................................. 326 V II. C oda ................................... 327 * Assoc. Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago, I1.; Adjunct Prof. liT-Chicago-Kent School of Law. Many thanks to those who offered suggestions on earlier drafts of this paper including Louis Altman, David P. Currie, Kenneth W. Dam, Richard A. Epstein, Dennis J. Hutchinson, Paul Garcia, William M. Landes, Lawrence Lessig, Michael W. McConnell, and Tracey Louise Meares.