Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006
Public Law 109-312 · H.R. 683 · 109th Congress · began in the House
Signed by George W. Bush (R) on Oct 6, 2006 · Commerce
Sponsor: Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX-21)
Cosponsors: None
Passage votes
- HouseVoice vote
- SenateUnanimous consent
Data notes
The final version of the law, as each chamber passed it. A chamber that passed it by voice vote or unanimous consent has no count. “Method not stated” means the record does not say how the chamber voted. Where the record has a member-by-member vote, the “Who voted for it” section shows who voted yea.
Summary
The Congressional Research Service’s plain-language summary of what the law does.
Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 - Amends the Trademark Act of 1946 to revise provisions relating to trademark dilution.
Entitles an owner of a famous mark that is distinctive to an injunction against another person who commences use of a mark of trade name, after it has become famous, in commerce in a manner that is likely to cause dilution by blurring or tarnishment, regardless of the presence or absence of actual or likely confusion, competition, or actual economic injury.
Defines a mark as famous if it is widely recognized by the general consuming public as a designation of the source of the goods or services of the mark's owner. Allows the court to consider all relevant factors when determining whether a mark is famous, including: (1) the duration, extent, and geographic reach of advertising and publicity of the mark; (2) the amount, volume, and geographic extent of sales of goods or services offered under the mark; (3) the extent of actual recognition of the mark; and (4) whether the mark was registered under the Act of March 3, 1881, or the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the principal register.
Defines "dilution by blurring" as an association arising from the similarity between a mark or trade name and a famous mark that impairs the distinctiveness of the famous mark. Allows the court to consider all relevant factors when determining whether a mark or trade name is likely to cause dilution by blurring, including: (1) the degree of similarity; (2) the degree of inherent or acquired distinctiveness of the famous mark; (3) the extent to which the owner of the famous mark is engaging in substantially exclusive use of the mark; (4) the degree of recognition of the famous mark; (5) whether the user of the mark or trade name intended to create an association with the famous mark; and (6) any actual association between the mark or trade name and the famous mark.
Defines "dilution by tarnishment" as an association arising from the similarity between a mark or trade name and a famous mark that harms the reputation of the famous mark.
Declares that certain acts are not actionable as dilution by blurring or tarnishment, including: (1) any fair use of a famous mark by another person other than as a designation of source for the person's own goods or services, including for advertising or promotion that permits consumers to compare goods or services, or identifying and parodying, criticizing, or commenting upon the famous mark owner or the owner's goods or services; (2) all forms of news reporting and news commentary; and (3) any noncommercial use of a mark.
Requires the person who asserts trade dress protection for trade dress not registered on the principal register in a civil action for trade dress dilution to prove that: (1) the claimed trade dress, taken as a whole, is not functional and is famous; and (2) if the claimed trade dress includes any mark or marks registered on the principal register, the unregistered matter, taken as a whole, is famous separate and apart from any fame of such registered marks.
Allows the owner of a famous mark to seek additional remedies in an action under this Act if the person against whom the injunction is sought: (1) first used the mark or trade name in commerce after the date of enactment of this Act; (2) willfully intended to trade on the recognition of the famous mark; or (3) willfully intended to harm the reputation of the famous mark.
Declares that ownership of a valid registration is a complete bar to an action under state common law or statute that seeks to prevent dilution by blurring or tarnishment or that asserts any claim of actual or likely damage or harm to the distinctiveness or reputation of a mark, label, or form of advertisement.
Committees
The committees the bill was sent to, and what each did with it.
Judiciary Committee · House · markup by, referred to, reported bySubcommittee: Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet Subcommittee
Data notes
A committee links to its page only where it exists in the current Congress; older and renamed committees are named without a link.
Related bills
The record lists no related bills.
Data notes
Related bills are identified by the Congressional Research Service, the House and the Senate: companion and identical bills, bills with similar text, bills that were folded into this law, and rules that brought it to the floor. A bill that is itself a public law in this site’s data links here; the others link to Congress.gov.
Timeline
From introduction to signing, newest first: the committees, the floor and the president. 33 actions.
- Oct 6, 2006Became lawBecame law · Became Public Law No: 109-312.
- Became lawBecame law · Signed by President.
- Sep 29, 2006FloorFloor · Presented to President.
- Sep 25, 2006Resolving differencesResolving differences · Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Resolving differencesResolving differences · On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote.
- Resolving differencesResolving differences · Mr. Sensenbrenner moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment.
- FloorFloor · DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment to H.R. 683.
- OtherOther · Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote.
- Mar 8, 2006FloorFloor · Message on Senate action sent to the House.
- FloorFloor · Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
- Feb 27, 2006CalendarCalendar · Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 366.
- CommitteeCommittee · Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Specter with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
- Feb 16, 2006CommitteeCommittee · Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
- Nov 3, 2005CommitteeCommittee · Committee on the Judiciary. Committee consideration and Mark Up Session held.
- Apr 20, 2005CommitteeCommittee · Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Apr 19, 2005FloorFloor · Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- FloorFloor · On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 411 - 8 (Roll no. 109).House roll call 109
- FloorFloor · Considered as unfinished business.
- FloorFloor · At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
- FloorFloor · DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 683.
- FloorFloor · Considered under suspension of the rules.
- FloorFloor · Mr. Sensenbrenner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
- Mar 17, 2005CalendarCalendar · Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 9.
- CommitteeCommittee · Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 109-23.
- Mar 9, 2005CommitteeCommittee · Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
- CommitteeCommittee · Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
- Mar 3, 2005CommitteeCommittee · Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
- CommitteeCommittee · Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
- Feb 17, 2005CommitteeCommittee · Subcommittee Hearings Held.
- CommitteeCommittee · Hearings by Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee
Data notes
Every action the Library of Congress lists for the bill, from introduction to signing, plus the dated committee hearings. The source lists many steps twice (the chamber’s own entry and the Library of Congress copy, or a presidential and a became-law entry with the same words); those are shown once. Amendments are listed in their own section.
Amendments
No amendments to this bill are on record.
Data notes
Amendments offered to this bill in either chamber, as the Library of Congress records them: each with a status read from its last recorded step: agreed to, rejected, withdrawn, ruled out of order, fell with another amendment, or offered with no vote recorded (most Senate amendments are only ever offered). The wording of each amendment is the source’s. Amendments to amendments and amendments to other bills are not listed.
Official record
The bill’s full text is on Congress.gov. Data through Oct 7, 2026.