Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 48-512 (2026)
Infringement.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Infringement.
Subject to the provisions of section 48-516, Idaho Code, any person who shall:
(1) Use, without the consent of the registrant, any reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation of a mark registered under this act in connection with the sale, distribution, offering for sale, or advertising of any goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive as to the source of origin of such goods or services; or
(2) Reproduce, counterfeit, copy or colorably imitate any such mark and apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation to labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles, or advertisements intended to be used upon or in connection with the sale or other distribution in this state of such goods or services, shall be liable in a civil action by the registrant for any and all of the remedies provided in section 48-514, Idaho Code, except that under this subsection the registrant shall not be entitled to recover profits or damages unless the acts have been committed with the intent to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1972–2021 · leading case: Mike Cohn, D.V.M. v. Petsmart, Inc., a Delaware Corp., 281 F.3d 837 (9th Cir. 2002).
Mike Cohn, D.V.M. v. Petsmart, Inc., a Delaware Corp., 281 F.3d 837 (9th Cir. 2002). “4 To *841 prove infringement under Idaho Code § 48-512 , Cohn must prove that Pets-mart’s use of “Where Pets are Family” creates a likelihood of confusion with his trademark.”
Nelson-Ricks Cheese Co. v. Lakeview Cheese Co., 331 F. Supp. 3d 1131 (D. Idaho 2018). “In conclusion, NRCC's claim for trademark infringement fails because, even construing all facts in the light most favorable to Plaintiff concerning the validity of the Mark, the evidence shows the Mark was not used in commerce, did not cause confusion, and did not cause any…”
Allied Maint. Corp. v. Allied Mech. Trades, Inc., 369 N.E.2d 1162 (NY 1977). “151; Idaho Code, § 48-512; 111 Rev Stat, ch 140, § 22; Iowa Code Ann, § 548.”
Wedgwood Homes, Inc. v. Lund, 659 P.2d 377 (Or. 1983). “151 (West 1972); Ga Code Ann § 106-115 (1968); Idaho Code § 48-512 (1977); Ill Ann Stat ch 140, § 22 (1982-83); Iowa Code Ann § 548.”
Jc Penney Co. v. Parrish Co., 339 F. Supp. 726 (D. Idaho 1972). “The unauthorized advertising, display and/or sale by defendant of merchandise bearing plaintiff’s “private label” trade names and/or trademarks constitutes a violation of Section 48-512, Idaho Code, known as the anti-dilution section of the Idaho Trade-Marks Act.”
Scoyni v. Salvador (D. Idaho 2020). “To the extent that Plaintiff’s claim includes a claim for trademark infringement under Idaho Code § 48-512 , the analysis is the same as above: When interpreting Idaho trademark infringement claims, courts look to the federal system of trademark registration and protection under…”
Nicholas Scoyni v. Daniel Salvador (9th Cir. 2021). “The district court properly concluded that Scoyni’s registration of the mark was void ab initio based on his failure to use his mark “in commerce” as required under the Lanham Act and Idaho Code § 48-512 , See 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051 (trademark), 1053 (service mark), 1127 (defining…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.