TupperWars update

Here's an update to my earlier post about TupperWars.

According to a message posted on the Tupperware Message Board of Yahoo! Finance, it appears CAFO had a section called "TupperWars" on their website. This changes the above analysis, but I think the result is still the same. If CAFO was just using the Tupperware mark, and was talking about Tupperware, then CAFO should be able to do that (I don't know all the facts of their messages, which could change my opinion). By using TupperWars, then we get into a question of whether they are attempting to profit from using a mark similar to that of Tupperware. I'd argue that they are not.

It is also perhaps quite obvious to anyone reading the section entitled "TupperWars" that the website is not part of Tupperware- and thus there is no confusion between the marks. The biggest issue in trademark infringement cases is often that of confusion between the two marks, and I'd bet money that it would be pretty easy to show that there is a very low likelihood of confusion between "TupperWars" and "Tupperware." While the two terms are different by only 1 letter, the different connotation of the two are quite different- war v. storage container. Couple that with the content of the "TupperWars" section, and I imagine that a strong case could be made that CAFO should be able to continue using their mark. More to come...]