Trademark dilution law, a relatively recent innovation in federal trademark doctrine, has serious implications for free expression. Dilution law purports to protect famous trademark owners from blurring and tarnishment, although critics of the doctrine suggest the harms of dilution are frequently overblown, if not imaginary. This article first highlights the differences between standard trademark infringement and trademark dilution, including the fair use provisions of the latter statute. It then analyzes the conceptual mismatch between the fair use provisions and dilution, focusing particularly on the problems with the nominative fair use doctrine. The article also explores the special problems dilution doctrine creates for parodists, including some court decisions that protect only an extremely narrow range of parodies. Finally, the article offers concluding perspectives on this difficult area of trademark doctrine.

中文翻译：

---

稀释自由表达：商标稀释法中的法定第一修正案

商标稀释法是联邦商标学说中相对较新的创新，对自由表达产生了严重的影响。淡化法旨在保护著名商标所有人免受模糊和污损的侵害，尽管对该学说的批评者认为，稀释的危害经常被夸大，即使不是想象中的。本文首先强调标准商标侵权与商标稀释之间的区别，包括后者法规的合理使用条款。然后，它分析了合理使用规定与摊薄之间的概念上的不匹配，特别着重于名义合理使用原则的问题。本文还探讨了稀释学说为模仿者带来的特殊问题，包括一些法院判决仅保护了极少数的模仿者。最后，