Final answer:
In a trademark dilution case, the NCAA would need to prove blurring or tarnishment of their 'March Madness' mark by 'Marsh Madness.' This is about the uniqueness and reputation attached to their mark, not just consumer confusion.
Step-by-step explanation:
The NCAA, in a case for trademark dilution, would have to prove that the unauthorized use of a mark similar to 'March Madness', such as 'Marsh Madness' for e-liquid, has caused dilution of their trademark. Specifically, in a federal trademark dilution claim, the NCAA would need to show (d) Blurring or tarnishment of their trademark. It's not necessarily about the likelihood of confusion, which is more pertinent to infringement cases, but rather the lessening of the distinctive quality (Blurring) or harm to the reputation (Tarnishment) of the famous mark. Using the example of the 2018 trademark infringement case between Buc-ee's and Choke Canyon, where Buc-ee's logo was protected as their intellectual property, it's clear that trademarks are vital in distinguishing brands. The court ruled in favor of Buc-ee's, recognizing that the similarity could lead to consumer confusion. However, in a dilution case like that of the NCAA, the focus would be on the harm to the distinctiveness or reputation of 'March Madness', regardless of the presence of actual consumer confusion.