## Facts

- Qualitex manufactured dry-cleaning press pads and, since the 1950s, used a distinctive green-gold color on its pads.
- In 1989, competitor Jacobson began selling press pads colored a similar green-gold.
- Qualitex obtained a federal registration in 1991 for the green-gold color as used on press pads.
- Qualitex sued Jacobson for unfair competition and later added a trademark infringement claim based on the registration.
- The district court found the color had acquired secondary meaning, Jacobson’s use was likely to cause confusion, and the color was nonfunctional; it entered judgment for Qualitex.
- The Ninth Circuit set aside the trademark infringement judgment, holding the Lanham Act does not allow registration of “color alone.”
- The Supreme Court granted review to resolve whether the Lanham Act permits trademark protection for a single color standing alone.

## Issues

1. Whether the Lanham Act permits a single color, by itself, to qualify for federal trademark registration and infringement protection.
2. Whether such protection is limited by the requirements of secondary meaning and nonfunctionality.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit and remanded.
- The Court held there is no absolute bar to trademark protection for “color alone.”
- A color may be registered and protected if it identifies source (secondary meaning) and is not functional.
- The Court rejected categorical policy objections (shade-boundary disputes and color depletion) as insufficient to justify a per se rule against color marks, given existing doctrines that limit overbroad claims.

## Legal Principles

- The Lanham Act’s definition of “trademark” is broad enough to include a color used as a “symbol” that identifies and distinguishes goods and indicates their source.
- A color can function as a mark only upon proof of secondary meaning—consumer association of the color with a single source.
- Trademark law does not protect functional features; a feature is functional if exclusive use would place competitors at a significant non-reputation-related disadvantage.
- Functionality and secondary-meaning requirements operate as limiting doctrines that prevent granting exclusive rights in colors needed for effective competition.

## Conclusion

A single color may receive trademark registration and infringement protection under the Lanham Act when, in the relevant market, it has acquired secondary meaning and its exclusive use would not impair competition because the color is nonfunctional.


Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Prods. Co., 514 U.S. 159 (1995)