Vacuum Oil Co. v. Climax Refining Co.
Decision Date | 03 February 1903 |
Docket Number | 1,115. |
Citation | 120 F. 254 |
Parties | VACUUM OIL CO. v. CLIMAX REFINING CO. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Before LURTON, DAY, and SEVERENS, Circuit Judges.
LURTON Circuit Judge, after making the foregoing statement of the case, .
Oils adapted for use in the cylinder of an engine as a lubricator must be capable of enduring a high degree of heat without burning or injury to their lubricating qualities. As lubricating oils having as a base petroleum came into use in competition with animal fat oils, so long exclusively used it became important to assure the consumers of the safety of the new lubricator at a high degree of heat.
It was found that a high grade of such oil ought to be able to endure 600 deg. of heat without taking fire from a flame brought into close contact. This led to the general adoption of 600 deg. as a proper test for a high grade of cylinder oil, and packages of oil which would stand that test, or higher, were accordingly branded with the figures '600,' sometimes with and sometimes without the degree sign; the figures being understood to indicate the fire test of the oil, whether the degree sign was added or not. The weight of the evidence shows that the figures '600,' in connection with the sale of cylinder oil had come to have this significance to the trade, and to makers of such oils, long before the complainant adopted which the defendants now use, was a not uncommon description stenciled on the head of barrels containing cylinder oil; the 'V' being an abbreviation of valve. There is satisfactory evidence that these methods of describing the oil included many other letters of the alphabet, including the letter 'W,' associated with '600.' This method of describing the test and grade or use of cylinder oil began before complainants appropriated '600W' as its exclusive brand, and has continued to find favor among some of the manufacturers and dealers ever since. Complainant claims to have adopted this symbol as a trade-mark indicating origin and ownership as far back as 1879. It is not clear that this early use of these well-understood methods of describing the quality or grade of the oil made or sold by it was not descriptive, as in the case of others. Not until 1886 did it undertake to register '600W' as a private trade-mark. But if we assume that its first use of '600W' was as a symbol indicating origin of manufacture, and not quality or grade, it is still confronted with the fact that, when it attempted to appropriate '600W' as its exclusive trade-mark, its competitors and rivals were using '600...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Dixi-Cola Laboratories v. Coca-Cola Co.
...v. Popular Mechanics Co., 3 Cir., 80 F.2d 194; Richmond Remedies Co. v. Dr. Miles Medical Co., 8 Cir., 16 F.2d 598; Vacuum Oil Co. v. Climax Refining Co., 6 Cir., 120 F. 254; Trinidad Asphalt Co. v. Standard Paint Co., 8 Cir., 163 F. 977, affirmed 220 U.S. 446, 31 S.Ct. 456, 55 L.Ed. 536. I......
-
Rubber & Celluloid Harness Trimming Co. v. F.W. Devoe & C.T. Reynolds Co.
... ... 603, 128 C.C.A. 203, ... L.R.A. 1915F, 1107 (C.C.A. 6th Cir.); Vacuum Oil Co. v ... Climax Refining Co., 120 F. 254, 256, 56 C.C.A. 90 ... (C.C.A. 6th Cir.); Fuller ... ...
-
Autoline Oil Co. v. Indian Refining Co.
...as a valid trade-mark." See, also, Beadleston & Woerz v. Cooke Brewing Co., 74 F. 229, 20 C. C. A. 405; Vacuum Oil Co. v. Climax Refining Co., 120 F. 254, 56 C. C. A. 90; Stevens Linen Works v. Wm. & John Don & Co. (C. C.) 121 F. 171; Affirmed in 127 F. 950, 62 C. C. A. 582; Dennison Mfg. C......
-
Dennison Mfg. Co. v. Scharf Tag, Label & Box Co.
... ... v. Standard Computing Scale Co., ... 118 F. 965, 967, 55 C.C.A. 459; Vacuum Oil Co. v. Climax ... Refining Co., 120 F. 254, 56 C.C.A. 90; Royal Baking ... Powder Co. v ... ...