Changes

==Implications==

==Implications==

Commentators noted that the decision has wide-reaching implications for trademark law in the context of domains. SCOTUSblog summarized the implications for brands and trademark practitioners:

Commentators noted that the decision has wide-reaching implications for trademark law in the context of domains. SCOTUSblog summarized the implications for brands and trademark practitioners:

<blockquote>Today’s decision significantly expands the availability of trademark protection for domain names, and limits the number of terms that will be deemed unprotectable because they are generic. The court did not explicitly discard the rule that generic words cannot be made into trademarks by persuading consumers to perceive them as trademarks, but it is difficult to see how that rule can be reconciled with the court’s rationale. Moreover, despite Sotomayor’s qualifications, it seems likely that the decision will make surveys even more essential in trademark litigation, and will encourage their use in the registration context as well.<ref>[https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/06/opinion-analysis-court-holds-that-generic-com-marks-may-be-registered-trademarks-or-service-marks-when-consumers-do-not-perceive-them-as-generic/ SCOTUSblog - Opinion Analysis, ''USPTO v. Booking.com''], June 30, 2020</ref>

<blockquote>Today’s decision significantly expands the availability of trademark protection for domain names, and limits the number of terms that will be deemed unprotectable because they are generic. The court did not explicitly discard the rule that generic words cannot be made into trademarks by persuading consumers to perceive them as trademarks, but it is difficult to see how that rule can be reconciled with the court’s rationale. Moreover, despite Sotomayor’s qualifications, it seems likely that the decision will make surveys even more essential in trademark litigation, and will encourage their use in the registration context as well.<ref>[https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/06/opinion-analysis-court-holds-that-generic-com-marks-may-be-registered-trademarks-or-service-marks-when-consumers-do-not-perceive-them-as-generic/ SCOTUSblog - Opinion Analysis, ''USPTO v. Booking.com''], June 30, 2020</ref></blockquote>

Practitioners noted that the Court offered no threshold or guidelines regarding what amount or quality of evidence would need to be presented, and that the PTO would likely issue restrictive guidance based on the ruling.<ref>[https://www.haynesboone.com/alerts/takeaways-from-uspto-v-bookingcom Hayes and Boone LLP - Takeaways from ''USPTO v. Booking.com''], July 10, 2020</ref> Nonetheless, it was also clear that the ruling marked an opportunity for brands:

Practitioners noted that the Court offered no threshold or guidelines regarding what amount or quality of evidence would need to be presented, and that the PTO would likely issue restrictive guidance based on the ruling.<ref>[https://www.haynesboone.com/alerts/takeaways-from-uspto-v-bookingcom Hayes and Boone LLP - Takeaways from ''USPTO v. Booking.com''], July 10, 2020</ref> Nonetheless, it was also clear that the ruling marked an opportunity for brands: