Court of Appeals Affirms that "M4" is Generic

Status
Not open for further replies.

Henry Bowman

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Messages
6,717
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
For those of you who may care, on Friday (May 18) the First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court (Maine) ruling in Colt Defense, LLC v. Bushmaster Firearms that the term "M4" is a generic designation for a type of carbine, not a protectable trademark that distinguishes one brand from another.

The district court had also ruled that the product configuration trade dress (look) of the M4 carbine was functional and, therefore, not protectable as an indicator of source (brand). This issue was not appealed.
 

Attachments

  • PLE Opinion Affirmed (W0758388).pdf
    80.2 KB · Views: 7
hmmm. wonder if HK's settlement with Colt is null and void.
I don't know the details of it. Some aspects may survive, but parts would be questionable. Colt has no trademark rights in "M4" to assert, but may have contractual rights to assert against H&K. Would have been smart for H&K to insist on an "unless and until a court issues a final order declaring that Colt has no rights..." I don't know if they did.
 
actually - that's bad news for you. Means that others can be called M4. If only yours could be called M4, it might even gain more resale value.
 
I think M4gery referred to neutered M4s, fake flash hider (or muzzle brake), no bayonet lug, fixed telestock, etc, during the '94 ban?

Kharn
 
Well, "real" M4s still have the happy switch and a 14.5" barrel, so the number of actual M4s out there in non-military hands is very small.

The rest are still just M4geries....
 
I think M4gery referred to neutered M4s, fake flash hider (or muzzle brake), no bayonet lug, fixed telestock, etc, during the '94 ban?
I am in CT, and my Bushy has all those neutered features...

Oh well, at least bullets still come out of the front thingy! :barf:

What a silly law!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top