Automating Abercrombie: Machine-learning trademark distinctiveness

IF 1.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Journal of Empirical Legal Studies Pub Date : 2024-11-17 DOI:10.1111/jels.12398
Shivam Adarsh, Elliott Ash, Stefan Bechtold, Barton Beebe, Jeanne Fromer
{"title":"Automating Abercrombie: Machine-learning trademark distinctiveness","authors":"Shivam Adarsh,&nbsp;Elliott Ash,&nbsp;Stefan Bechtold,&nbsp;Barton Beebe,&nbsp;Jeanne Fromer","doi":"10.1111/jels.12398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Trademark law protects marks to enable firms to signal their products' qualities to consumers. To qualify for protection, a mark must be able to identify and distinguish goods. US courts typically locate a mark on a “spectrum of distinctiveness”—known as the <i>Abercrombie</i> spectrum—that categorizes marks as fanciful, arbitrary, or suggestive, and thus as “inherently distinctive,” or as descriptive or generic, and thus as not inherently distinctive. This article explores whether locating trademarks on the <i>Abercrombie</i> spectrum can be automated using current natural-language processing techniques. Using about 1.5 million US trademark registrations between 2012 and 2019 as well as 2.2 million related USPTO office actions, the article presents a machine-learning model that learns semantic features of trademark applications and predicts whether a mark is inherently distinctive. Our model can predict trademark actions with 86% accuracy overall, and it can identify subsets of trademark applications where it is highly certain in its predictions of distinctiveness. Using an eXplainable AI (XAI) algorithm, we further analyze which features in trademark applications drive our model's predictions. We then explore the practical and normative implications of our approach. On a practical level, we outline a decision-support system that could, as a “robot trademark clerk,” assist trademark experts in their determination of a trademark's distinctiveness. Such a system could also help trademark experts understand which features of a trademark application contribute the most toward a trademark's distinctiveness. On a theoretical level, we discuss the normative limits of the <i>Abercrombie</i> spectrum and propose to move beyond <i>Abercrombie</i> for trademarks whose distinctiveness is uncertain. We discuss how machine-learning projects in the law not only inform us about the aspects of the legal system that may be automated in the future, but also force us to tackle normative tradeoffs that may be invisible otherwise.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"21 4","pages":"826-860"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12398","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jels.12398","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Trademark law protects marks to enable firms to signal their products' qualities to consumers. To qualify for protection, a mark must be able to identify and distinguish goods. US courts typically locate a mark on a “spectrum of distinctiveness”—known as the Abercrombie spectrum—that categorizes marks as fanciful, arbitrary, or suggestive, and thus as “inherently distinctive,” or as descriptive or generic, and thus as not inherently distinctive. This article explores whether locating trademarks on the Abercrombie spectrum can be automated using current natural-language processing techniques. Using about 1.5 million US trademark registrations between 2012 and 2019 as well as 2.2 million related USPTO office actions, the article presents a machine-learning model that learns semantic features of trademark applications and predicts whether a mark is inherently distinctive. Our model can predict trademark actions with 86% accuracy overall, and it can identify subsets of trademark applications where it is highly certain in its predictions of distinctiveness. Using an eXplainable AI (XAI) algorithm, we further analyze which features in trademark applications drive our model's predictions. We then explore the practical and normative implications of our approach. On a practical level, we outline a decision-support system that could, as a “robot trademark clerk,” assist trademark experts in their determination of a trademark's distinctiveness. Such a system could also help trademark experts understand which features of a trademark application contribute the most toward a trademark's distinctiveness. On a theoretical level, we discuss the normative limits of the Abercrombie spectrum and propose to move beyond Abercrombie for trademarks whose distinctiveness is uncertain. We discuss how machine-learning projects in the law not only inform us about the aspects of the legal system that may be automated in the future, but also force us to tackle normative tradeoffs that may be invisible otherwise.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自动化阿伯克龙比:机器学习商标显著性
商标法保护商标,使企业能够向消费者表明其产品的质量。要获得保护,商标必须能够识别和区分商品。美国法院通常将商标置于一个 "显著性频谱 "上--被称为 "阿伯克龙比频谱"--该频谱将商标分为幻想性、任意性或暗示性,因此具有 "固有显著性",或描述性或通用性,因此不具有固有显著性。本文探讨了能否利用当前的自然语言处理技术自动定位阿伯克龙比频谱上的商标。文章利用 2012 年至 2019 年间的约 150 万件美国商标注册以及 220 万件相关的美国专利商标局办公室诉讼,提出了一个机器学习模型,该模型可以学习商标申请的语义特征,并预测商标是否具有固有显著性。我们的模型预测商标诉讼的总体准确率为 86%,并且可以识别出其显著性预测非常确定的商标申请子集。利用可解释人工智能(XAI)算法,我们进一步分析了商标申请中的哪些特征推动了我们模型的预测。然后,我们探讨了我们的方法在实践和规范方面的意义。在实践层面,我们概述了一种决策支持系统,它可以作为 "机器人商标事务员",协助商标专家确定商标的显著性。该系统还能帮助商标专家了解商标申请中哪些特征对商标的显著性贡献最大。在理论层面,我们讨论了阿伯克龙比频谱的规范限制,并建议对显著性不确定的商标超越阿伯克龙比。我们讨论了法律中的机器学习项目如何不仅让我们了解法律体系中未来可能实现自动化的方面,而且迫使我们解决在其他方面可能看不到的规范性权衡问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
11.80%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Market versus policy responses to novel occupational risks Network analysis of lawyer referral markets: Evidence from Indiana Emotional bargaining after litigation: An experimental study of the Coase theorem Automating Abercrombie: Machine-learning trademark distinctiveness
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1