Trademark law consists of legal and specially economic foundations. Thus, the requirement of this assessment related judgments is the awareness of its foundations. The aim of trademark law is facilitating of trade in market and achieving of economic efficiency, beside the consideration of moral normative. So it's important that the consequence of judgment accords with the ambition of trademark law. Nonetheless, nowadays to what extent judgments are based on foundations? Theses day to what extent judgments fulfill the goals of trademark law? this essay seek to answer to these questions by explanation of the foundations of trademark law and criticizes judgments based on this explanations. This essay indicates courts pay attention to legal foundations more than economic foundations, whilst economic nature trademark should be paid more attention to consideration of economic foundations during adjudication.

Recordal of a trademark license is an instrument established by legal systems to ensure the security of transactions and protect third parties. Perspectives of countries on registration requirements, including the applicant, the required documents and the content of the contract are not the same. This leads to differences in the views of countries on the effects of recordal, including use of a mark on behalf of the holder, the licensee’s right to sue  and the status of opposing trademark transactions; However, the commonality of these views can be described as “Effects vis-à-vis third parties”. In the present article, While analyzing the requirements and effects of recordal of trademark license under the Singapore Treaty, the EU Trademark Regulation and Iranian law, using the findings, an attempt has been made to criticize the “Industrial Property Protection bill” regarding the development of appropriate registration system for trademark licenses. According to this article, there is no need to register a trademark license in a notary public, and the license must be recordable by both the licensor and the licensee without having to provide all the provisions of the contract in the Industrial Property Office.

Trademark functions and their impact on sales are increasingly expanding. Trademark regeneration falls into the domain of sophisticated marketing strategies and if it is not accompanied by strategic environmental scrutiny it is likely to damage the brand equity. This article has been conducted to identify, evaluate and design a key brand regeneration pattern at the company level using a qualitative method. The sample consisted of 17 experts from four food industries and four universities. Sample size was determined according to the theoretical saturation approach. Interviews were conducted with a six-question protocol and they are coded into relevant concepts. At the later stage, initial categories were classified with higher abstraction, and finally the commonality existing among initial categories resulted in the creation of main categories. The results, according to the suggested model, showed that "market positioning, new brand assessment and new identification" as a core category based on conditions of "preparedness for trademark change and organizational support" through strategies of "creating prospects and policies of macroenvironment and effective advertising"by considering "the allocation of resources for reconstruction and creating the special value of a trademark" will lead to the realization of the consequences of creating a new brand, the company's growth and development, and increased profitability.

Trademark parody which has been recognized as an example of freedom of speech is a means to comment on products introduced by trademark. In this type of imitation, inspired by the original trademark, a humorous form of it is drawn in order to convey a specific message to the reader. Here, the benefits of three groups are at stake: trademark owners who enjoy exclusive rights; parodists who enjoy freedom of expression, and the public who are entitled to benefit from the results of parody. In the law of the Unites States and countries such as France and Germany, case law has played a significant role in balancing these conflicting interests. Similarity between the parodied trademark and parody and the specific effect of parody on the trademark have led trademark owners to bring infringement and dilution actions. In the Iranian law, there is no specific provision as to trademark parody. However, principle 24 the Iranian Constitution concerning freedom of expression is a suitable basis for recognizing trademark parody. In this paper, it has been suggested to provide for parody in laws as an exception to trademark owners exclusive rights and to declare its boundaries.

Sectional distinctiveness is a requirement for trademark protection. However, all legal systems in determining the distinction of a part of the way to support distinguishing marks, and also the effect of the minimum descriptiveness of the mark, in a way that does not harm the distinctiveness of the trademark, They have not adopted a common approach, so that by delving into the judicial procedure and doctrine of different countries, It is possible to separate the symptoms into weak and strong according to their degree of differentiation, and accordingly different legal protection of trademarks, depending on which of the above categories it is mentioned. The decision of the Federal Court of Switzerland in 2000 and the Benelux Court of Justice, which was later repeatedly upheld by the courts, Doctrine and Administration of Internal Market Harmonization of the European Union is included, It has not had any effect on the jurisprudence of Iran's courts, even if indirectly, And the trace of this separation is evident in the recent decisions of the appeals courts in the field of trademarks.

According to Article 32 (1) of the American Trademark law, trademark infringement is commercial use with no permition of the mark of another in a way that causes likelihood of confusion to product or service, their origin or affiliation to that origin. The grounds of of realization trademark infringement in us include the existence of valid mark whether registered or unregistered and using of mark, being the use commercial, proof of likelihood of confusion. Also the Iranian patent, industrial dedign and trademark law, introduce the non permission use of anothers mark and accoring likelehood of confusion of the consumer, the requirements of civil liability from the trademark infringement and like lanham act, do not mention the negligince of defendant. However, studing the judicial perecents shaws that in iraninn law, existing of valid registered or unregistered mark and being the use of anothers mark commercial, is the realization of infringement. Unlike the American system, Iranian law does not mention the confusion arising from affiliation and confusion following such confusion, is considered under the false advertising. In compare with the lanham act, with respect to the irrelevance of it in confision of consumer, this is the advantage of Iran's law. In this paper, emphasizing judgements of courts of us and Iran, analyzing these elements will be discussed and appropriate proposals presented during the discussion of the project.