Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. McNeil-P.P.C., INC case brief summary

• Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. McNeil-P.P.C., INC case brief summary
  
  FACTS
  Appellee manufactured Excedrin PM for more than 20 years, appellant introduced its Tylenol PM, which was also a combination analgesic/sleep aid. Appellee claims it will cause confusion under 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1125(a)
• HELD: The court affirmed finding that "PM," when affixed to an analgesic trade name, was descriptive of a combination analgesic/sleep aid and that the "PM" designator had not acquired secondary meaning.
• To show secondary meaning, a manufacturer must show that in the minds of the public, the primary significance of a product feature or term is to identify the source rather than the product.
• Can be shown with:
• Amount and manner of advertising
• Consumer studies
• Direct consumer testimony
• Sales success
• Unsolicited media coverage
• Established place in the market
• Attempts to plagiarize
• Length of exclusivity of use