wilburTheDog

The Rogers test comes from the 1989 case Rogers vs Grimaldi where a Ginger Rogers sued the defendants for making the flim "Ginger and Fred", saying they used her name and people thought she was involved in the film. The court ruled in favor of the defendants, finding that the film was a work of artistic expression, not a commercial product, an therefore not subject to the Lanham Act. The court used the Rogers test, which states that the use of a third-party mark in an expressive work does not violate the Lanham Act “Unless the title has no artistic relevance to the underlying work whatsoever, or, if it has some artistic relevance, unless the title misleads as to the source or the content of the work.”

Since then the Rogers test has been used rather inconsistently by various courts. In Cliff Notes vs Bantam, the defendant was selling books that parodied cliff notes, and used their distinctive black and yellow trade dress. The court ruled for the defendant, saying Rogers test applied because the defendant's use did not create a strong likelihood of confusion, ignoring the artistic relevance part of the Rogers test. Other courts have required a "particularly compelling" likelihood of confusion and have generally favored artistic expression, though not always.

"India’s diesel exports tripled to ~1,600,000 barrels per day in March 2023, compared to a year ago, making diesel one of the largest components of India-EU trade."