Practice question
A junior user argues that no consumer has yet testified to an actual mistaken purchase, so likelihood of confusion is legally impossible. Which is correct?
- Actual confusion is indispensable in every case
- Evidence of actual confusion is a relevant factor, but its absence is not an automatic bar to likelihood-of-confusion analysis
- A single complaint is always conclusive
- Every new mark is automatically confusing
- Only a consumer referendum can decide
Legal references
- Kolin Electronics Co., Inc. v. Kolin Philippines International, Inc., G.R. No. 228165, February 9, 2021, en banc main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/feb2021/gr_228165_2021.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.