A Manhattan jury found that Mason Rothschild's MetaBirkins NFTs infringed and diluted the famous Birkin mark — and that the First Amendment did not save them. The case maps how dilution doctrine and Rogers v. Grimaldi apply to digital goods.
After more than a decade of litigation, the Second Circuit held that even a famous mark cannot prove dilution by blurring without meaningful similarity and real evidence of association — affirming judgment for a tiny New Hampshire roaster.
The Fourth Circuit held that a successful parody can defeat both blurring and tarnishment claims under the revised dilution statute — because a good parody depends on, and reinforces, the very distinctiveness it pokes fun at.
The Supreme Court held that the original Federal Trademark Dilution Act required proof of actual dilution — not a mere likelihood of it — a reading so demanding that Congress rewrote the statute three years later.
