The thesis investigates the concept of trademark dilution under international and regional trademark law, and under the laws of selected jurisdictions; namely, the United States of America, Germany, the United Kingdom and the Republic of South Africa. The investigation includes measures undertaken to prohibit the internet-based dilution of famous marks through the registration of confusingly similar domain names. It is noted that dilution is imprecisely formulated under international trademark treaty law. In fact, the term "dilution" does not appear in international trademark treaties. To fill the gap of international trademark treaties, various policy initiatives, or `soft law' have been developed, which to some extent clarify both the concept of dilution, the type of mark protected from dilution, and the scope of such protection. The problem is that the policy initiatives are non-binding on States, so that different States have adopted different common law and statutory approaches to the protection of marks against dilution. This is demonstrated, for example, by the fact that the European Union and its Member States provide protection from dilution to "marks with a reputation", while the United States of America provides such protection only to "famous" marks, and the Republic of South Africa protects "marks which are well-known in the Republic" from dilution. The thesis analyses the protection granted in these jurisdictions, to determine the similarities and differences of approach, and to make appropriate law reform proposals to achieve uniformity of protection. In the final analysis, it is concluded that the burden of enforcing dilution provisions rest on the judiciary. This being so, the judiciary is urged to engage in a balancing exercise in deciding dilution cases. The courts should recognize that dilution provisions are powerful tools at the disposal of owners of trademarks with advertising value. At the same time, the courts should be steadfast in ensuring that protection from dilution does not stultify freedom of trade, or create absolute monopolies or a form of copyright in a trademark. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.

The thesis investigates the concept of trademark dilution under international and regional trademark law, and under the laws of selected jurisdictions; namely, the United States of America, Germany, the United Kingdom and the Republic of South Africa. The investigation includes measures undertaken to prohibit the internet-based dilution of famous marks through the registration of confusingly similar domain names. It is noted that dilution is imprecisely formulated under international trademark treaty law. In fact, the term "dilution" does not appear in international trademark treaties. To fill the gap of international trademark treaties, various policy initiatives, or `soft law' have been developed, which to some extent clarify both the concept of dilution, the type of mark protected from dilution, and the scope of such protection. The problem is that the policy initiatives are non-binding on States, so that different States have adopted different common law and statutory approaches to the protection of marks against dilution. This is demonstrated, for example, by the fact that the European Union and its Member States provide protection from dilution to "marks with a reputation", while the United States of America provides such protection only to "famous" marks, and the Republic of South Africa protects "marks which are well-known in the Republic" from dilution. The thesis analyses the protection granted in these jurisdictions, to determine the similarities and differences of approach, and to make appropriate law reform proposals to achieve uniformity of protection. In the final analysis, it is concluded that the burden of enforcing dilution provisions rest on the judiciary. This being so, the judiciary is urged to engage in a balancing exercise in deciding dilution cases. The courts should recognize that dilution provisions are powerful tools at the disposal of owners of trademarks with advertising value. At the same time, the courts should be steadfast in ensuring that protection from dilution does not stultify freedom of trade, or create absolute monopolies or a form of copyright in a trademark. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.