World Intellectual Property Review Publishes Article by Lauren Leipold and John Heinbockel on Defining Trademark Use

World Intellectual Property Review published an article by Lauren Leipold and John "J.C." Heinbockel of Seyfarth, “Lessons from Nutramax on defining trademark ‘use’.” The article, featured in the publication's first 2026 issue, examines how courts interpret “use in commerce” under US trademark law—and why imprecise contract language can create unintended risk.

The authors analyze the Northern District of Georgia’s recent decision in Nutramax Laboratories v. Rowlo, highlighting how differing statutory standards for trademark “use” can lead to divergent outcomes depending on whether the dispute involves registration, infringement, or breach of contract. The article underscores the importance of carefully defining “use” in settlement agreements and licenses, particularly in the context of keyword advertising and other non‑consumer‑facing conduct.

As Leipold and Heinbockel explain:

“Given the multitude of context‑dependent definitions of trademark use, parties hoping to agree upon standards governing their adversaries’ conduct should spell those standards out in detail. Courts may not necessarily hold that ‘use’ equates to consumer‑facing ‘use in commerce’ unless the agreement explicitly says so, especially given differing statutory language and differing judicial interpretations of trademark “use” in various contexts.”

The full article is available here, and the complete magazine can be accessed here.