[JURIST] The US Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a company that had used the term "micro color" to describe its cosmetic product did not have the burden of showing that there was no likelihood of consumers confusing that product with a similarly-named product by another manufacturer alleging trademark infringement, but rather than the plaintiff manufacturer had the positive burden of showing that there was likely consumer confusion as a result of the practice. The full text of the court's opinion in KP Permanent Make-up Inc. v. Lasting Impression (case backgrounder from Duke Law School's Program in Public Law) is here [PDF; per Justice Souter]. AP has more.