Litigation, the defendant was an authorized distributor for the plaintiff, whereas in the time between the filing of the California Litigation and the current suit, the plaintiff had terminated its distribution agreement with the defendant. Because the underlying theory of trademark law is to protect consumers from confusion by allowing companies to register marks to serve as source indicators , this change in the legal relationship between the parties is a meaningful one. The shift in the manner in which the defendant used the website is also a significant change of fact because in trademark infringement and unfair competition cases the use by the defendant must be analyzed on a case by case basis to determine the likelihood of consumer d., 129 F.Supp.2d 1033, 1047 (S.D.Tex., 2001) (<HOLDING>). The defendant argues that because the issues
holding that the act is retroactive holding retroactive application holding that the act is not retroactive holding apprendi is not retroactive holding that the acpa is not unconstitutionally retroactive