publications, and only one of these fourteen showed the cover. The other four pertinent references were published in trade magazines, publications that the general population likely did not see. Thus, there is only one reference that the public will have seen that contains Sports Traveler Magazine’s trade dress. This reference is the only pertinent one to this factor because in making the secondary meaning determination, the Court must analyze whether a consumer would link the trade dress to the product’s source. The Court fi C.P.A. 931, 299 F.2d 855, 862 (C.C.P.A. 1962) (Holding that $3,000,000 in sales in one year was insufficient to establish secondary meaning); Arrow Fastener Co. v. Stanley Works, 870 F.Supp. 427, 428 (D.Conn.1994), rev’d on other grounds, 59 F.3d 384 (2d Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); Time Inc., 712 F.Supp. at 1108 (holding that
holding that sales of 40000000 staplers and over 500000000 boxes of staples led to finding of secondary meaning holding that copying is only evidence of secondary meaning if the defendants intent in copying is to confuse consumers and pass off his product as the plaintiffs in that situation the defendants belief that plaintiffs trade dress has acquired secondary meaning  so that his copying will indeed facilitate his passing off  is some evidence that the trade dress actually has acquired secondary meaning holding that exercising general jurisdiction over defendant was improper where its actual sales in florida were a small percentage of the total sales and therefore these sales were de minimis  holding that 20000000 harlequin presents books sold in united states in 1979 led to finding of secondary meaning holding that inconsistent advertising of an alleged protected trademark for five years did not establish secondary meaning