15 U.S.C. § 1125 : US Code - Section 1125: False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden

    (a) Civil action
      (1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or
    services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word,
    term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any
    false designation of origin, false or misleading description of
    fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which - 
        (A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to
      deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such
      person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or
      approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities
      by another person, or
        (B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the
      nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his
      or her or another person's goods, services, or commercial
      activities,

    shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that
    he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.
      (2) As used in this subsection, the term "any person" includes
    any State, instrumentality of a State or employee of a State or
    instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity.
    Any State, and any such instrumentality, officer, or employee,
    shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter in the same
    manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.
      (3) In a civil action for trade dress infringement under this
    chapter for trade dress not registered on the principal register,
    the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of
    proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional.
    (b) Importation
      Any goods marked or labeled in contravention of the provisions of
    this section shall not be imported into the United States or
    admitted to entry at any customhouse of the United States. The
    owner, importer, or consignee of goods refused entry at any
    customhouse under this section may have any recourse by protest or
    appeal that is given under the customs revenue laws or may have the
    remedy given by this chapter in cases involving goods refused entry
    or seized.
    (c) Dilution by blurring; dilution by tarnishment
      (1) Injunctive relief
        Subject to the principles of equity, the owner of a famous mark
      that is distinctive, inherently or through acquired
      distinctiveness, shall be entitled to an injunction against
      another person who, at any time after the owner's mark has become
      famous, commences use of a mark or trade name in commerce that is
      likely to cause dilution by blurring or dilution by tarnishment
      of the famous mark, regardless of the presence or absence of
      actual or likely confusion, of competition, or of actual economic
      injury.
      (2) Definitions
        (A) For purposes of paragraph (1), a mark is famous if it is
      widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United
      States as a designation of source of the goods or services of the
      mark's owner. In determining whether a mark possesses the
      requisite degree of recognition, the court may consider all
      relevant factors, including the following:
          (i) The duration, extent, and geographic reach of advertising
        and publicity of the mark, whether advertised or publicized by
        the owner or third parties.
          (ii) The amount, volume, and geographic extent of sales of
        goods or services offered under the mark.
          (iii) The extent of actual recognition of the mark.
          (iv) Whether the mark was registered under the Act of March
        3, 1881, or the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the principal
        register.

        (B) For purposes of paragraph (1), "dilution by blurring" is
      association arising from the similarity between a mark or trade
      name and a famous mark that impairs the distinctiveness of the
      famous mark. In determining whether a mark or trade name is
      likely to cause dilution by blurring, the court may consider all
      relevant factors, including the following:
          (i) The degree of similarity between the mark or trade name
        and the famous mark.
          (ii) The degree of inherent or acquired distinctiveness of
        the famous mark.
          (iii) The extent to which the owner of the famous mark is
        engaging in substantially exclusive use of the mark.
          (iv) The degree of recognition of the famous mark.
          (v) Whether the user of the mark or trade name intended to
        create an association with the famous mark.
          (vi) Any actual association between the mark or trade name
        and the famous mark.

        (C) For purposes of paragraph (1), "dilution by tarnishment" is
      association arising from the similarity between a mark or trade
      name and a famous mark that harms the reputation of the famous
      mark.
      (3) Exclusions
        The following shall not be actionable as dilution by blurring
      or dilution by tarnishment under this subsection:
          (A) Any fair use, including a nominative or descriptive fair
        use, or facilitation of such 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 use in connection
        with - 
            (i) advertising or promotion that permits consumers to
          compare goods or services; or
            (ii) identifying and parodying, criticizing, or commenting
          upon the famous mark owner or the goods or services of the
          famous mark owner.

          (B) All forms of news reporting and news commentary.
          (C) Any noncommercial use of a mark.
      (4) Burden of proof
        In a civil action for trade dress dilution under this chapter
      for trade dress not registered on the principal register, the
      person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of
      proving that - 
          (A) the claimed trade dress, taken as a whole, is not
        functional and is famous; and
          (B) 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.
      (5) Additional remedies
        In an action brought under this subsection, the owner of the
      famous mark shall be entitled to injunctive relief as set forth
      in section 1116 of this title. The owner of the famous mark shall
      also be entitled to the remedies set forth in sections 1117(a)
      and 1118 of this title, subject to the discretion of the court
      and the principles of equity if - 
          (A) the mark or trade name that is likely to cause dilution
        by blurring or dilution by tarnishment was first used in
        commerce by the person against whom the injunction is sought
        after October 6, 2006; and
          (B) in a claim arising under this subsection - 
            (i) by reason of dilution by blurring, the person against
          whom the injunction is sought willfully intended to trade on
          the recognition of the famous mark; or
            (ii) by reason of dilution by tarnishment, the person
          against whom the injunction is sought willfully intended to
          harm the reputation of the famous mark.
      (6) Ownership of valid registration a complete bar to action
        The ownership by a person of a valid registration under the Act
      of March 3, 1881, or the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the
      principal register under this chapter shall be a complete bar to
      an action against that person, with respect to that mark, that - 
          (A)(i) is brought by another person under the common law or a
        statute of a State; and
          (ii) seeks to prevent dilution by blurring or dilution by
        tarnishment; or
          (B) asserts any claim of actual or likely damage or harm to
        the distinctiveness or reputation of a mark, label, or form of
        advertisement.
      (7) Savings clause
        Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to impair,
      modify, or supersede the applicability of the patent laws of the
      United States.
    (d) Cyberpiracy prevention
      (1)(A) A person shall be liable in a civil action by the owner of
    a mark, including a personal name which is protected as a mark
    under this section, if, without regard to the goods or services of
    the parties, that person - 
        (i) has a bad faith intent to profit from that mark, including
      a personal name which is protected as a mark under this section;
      and
        (ii) registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that - 
          (I) in the case of a mark that is distinctive at the time of
        registration of the domain name, is identical or confusingly
        similar to that mark;
          (II) in the case of a famous mark that is famous at the time
        of registration of the domain name, is identical or confusingly
        similar to or dilutive of that mark; or
          (III) is a trademark, word, or name protected by reason of
        section 706 of title 18 or section 220506 of title 36.

      (B)(i) In determining whether a person has a bad faith intent
    described under subparagraph (A), a court may consider factors such
    as, but not limited to - 
        (I) the trademark or other intellectual property rights of the
      person, if any, in the domain name;
        (II) the extent to which the domain name consists of the legal
      name of the person or a name that is otherwise commonly used to
      identify that person;
        (III) the person's prior use, if any, of the domain name in
      connection with the bona fide offering of any goods or services;
        (IV) the person's bona fide noncommercial or fair use of the
      mark in a site accessible under the domain name;
        (V) the person's intent to divert consumers from the mark
      owner's online location to a site accessible under the domain
      name that could harm the goodwill represented by the mark, either
      for commercial gain or with the intent to tarnish or disparage
      the mark, by creating a likelihood of confusion as to the source,
      sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the site;
        (VI) the person's offer to transfer, sell, or otherwise assign
      the domain name to the mark owner or any third party for
      financial gain without having used, or having an intent to use,
      the domain name in the bona fide offering of any goods or
      services, or the person's prior conduct indicating a pattern of
      such conduct;
        (VII) the person's provision of material and misleading false
      contact information when applying for the registration of the
      domain name, the person's intentional failure to maintain
      accurate contact information, or the person's prior conduct
      indicating a pattern of such conduct;
        (VIII) the person's registration or acquisition of multiple
      domain names which the person knows are identical or confusingly
      similar to marks of others that are distinctive at the time of
      registration of such domain names, or dilutive of famous marks of
      others that are famous at the time of registration of such domain
      names, without regard to the goods or services of the parties;
      and
        (IX) the extent to which the mark incorporated in the person's
      domain name registration is or is not distinctive and famous
      within the meaning of subsection (c).

      (ii) Bad faith intent described under subparagraph (A) shall not
    be found in any case in which the court determines that the person
    believed and had reasonable grounds to believe that the use of the
    domain name was a fair use or otherwise lawful.
      (C) In any civil action involving the registration, trafficking,
    or use of a domain name under this paragraph, a court may order the
    forfeiture or cancellation of the domain name or the transfer of
    the domain name to the owner of the mark.
      (D) A person shall be liable for using a domain name under
    subparagraph (A) only if that person is the domain name registrant
    or that registrant's authorized licensee.
      (E) As used in this paragraph, the term "traffics in" refers to
    transactions that include, but are not limited to, sales,
    purchases, loans, pledges, licenses, exchanges of currency, and any
    other transfer for consideration or receipt in exchange for
    consideration.
      (2)(A) The owner of a mark may file an in rem civil action
    against a domain name in the judicial district in which the domain
    name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name
    authority that registered or assigned the domain name is located if
    - 
        (i) the domain name violates any right of the owner of a mark
      registered in the Patent and Trademark Office, or protected under
      subsection (a) or (c) of this section; and
        (ii) the court finds that the owner - 
          (I) is not able to obtain in personam jurisdiction over a
        person who would have been a defendant in a civil action under
        paragraph (1); or
          (II) through due diligence was not able to find a person who
        would have been a defendant in a civil action under paragraph
        (1) by - 
            (aa) sending a notice of the alleged violation and intent
          to proceed under this paragraph to the registrant of the
          domain name at the postal and e-mail address provided by the
          registrant to the registrar; and
            (bb) publishing notice of the action as the court may
          direct promptly after filing the action.

      (B) The actions under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall constitute
    service of process.
      (C) In an in rem action under this paragraph, a domain name shall
    be deemed to have its situs in the judicial district in which - 
        (i) the domain name registrar, registry, or other domain name
      authority that registered or assigned the domain name is located;
      or
        (ii) documents sufficient to establish control and authority
      regarding the disposition of the registration and use of the
      domain name are deposited with the court.

      (D)(i) The remedies in an in rem action under this paragraph
    shall be limited to a court order for the forfeiture or
    cancellation of the domain name or the transfer of the domain name
    to the owner of the mark. Upon receipt of written notification of a
    filed, stamped copy of a complaint filed by the owner of a mark in
    a United States district court under this paragraph, the domain
    name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name
    authority shall - 
        (I) expeditiously deposit with the court documents sufficient
      to establish the court's control and authority regarding the
      disposition of the registration and use of the domain name to the
      court; and
        (II) not transfer, suspend, or otherwise modify the domain name
      during the pendency of the action, except upon order of the
      court.

      (ii) The domain name registrar or registry or other domain name
    authority shall not be liable for injunctive or monetary relief
    under this paragraph except in the case of bad faith or reckless
    disregard, which includes a willful failure to comply with any such
    court order.
      (3) The civil action established under paragraph (1) and the in
    rem action established under paragraph (2), and any remedy
    available under either such action, shall be in addition to any
    other civil action or remedy otherwise applicable.
      (4) The in rem jurisdiction established under paragraph (2) shall
    be in addition to any other jurisdiction that otherwise exists,
    whether in rem or in personam.