In 2012 The Butcher opens her doors in Amsterdam. A new culinary concept based on high standard hamburgers, which are prepared with fresh ingredients. The hamburger meat is on display so the consumer can actually see what they are about to eat. In order to protect its rights the company registered its name as a trademark. This is clever because trademarks give a larger scope of protection than mere tradenames. A trademark registration would enable the owner to stop other companies from using the name in cities far beyond Amsterdam.
A number of large supermarkets seems to almost enjoy offering products that are very similar to well-known brands. Until recently, the emphasis was mostly on the packaging. Nowadays they are not reluctant to tie in with the actual brand name either. The idea is simple. Consumers are familiar with the quality of a well-known brand. By choosing a trademark that is very similar to this brand consumers may be coaxed into buying the private label more easily. The question remains, however, whether this is always allowed?
This past month the first part of the eBook series IE-in bedrijf (IP-in company), for which we are the co-author, was launched. The series follows the life cycle of a company (from start to take over). The first part is about name creation and focuses on tradename and trademark rights. What to think of with a new name, and what the consequences are of registering or not registering the trademark, as well as which pitfalls and dangers to expect.
Social media is becoming more important in communication. Some companies anticipate on this. Coca Cola (2 million followers on Twitter), for example has recently filed two trademark applications for her slogans in combination with a hashtag: #cokeandpics and #smilewithacoke. With these registrations the company wishes to secure her social media campaign.
A trademark right does not only give protection against use by other of the trademark for similar products, but also for complementary products. The question is, however, how far does this reach? Porsche has registered the trademark CARRERA in 1976 for sports cars. After manufacturing the Porsche Carrera GT (2006), a European trademark is applied for CARRERA for navigation equipment. Porsche opposes this application.
Plaintiff makes furniture made of glass fiber and polyethyleen and is the maker of the Ball Chair (designed in 1998(. Ramblaz produces promotion articles and at the request of a brewery a char that looks very much like the Ball Chair. When Ramblaz is confronted by the designer he does not deny the copying, but claims that there are no copyrights, enabling him to freely copy the chair.
An object only receives copyright protection if it is original, and an independent intellectual creation. Which defendant claims it is not since there is an older chair made by Eero Aarnio in 1968, which also features a ball.
Call us: 071-5763116 or send an e-mail: info@abcor-ip.com
Een korte introductie tekst over de nieuwsbrief waarin je uitlegt wat het is. Hoe je direct de nieuwste editie kunt lezen en hoe je je kunt abonneren. And click here for all the numbers.
Among others in this issue:
• EUIPO vs Mora TV: weigering geluidsmerk
• Jägermeister vs Alte Heiler: stop Russische copycat
• Stichting Nederlandse Top 40: gericht op Benelux?
• Tijdschrift HART vs Hermitage: soortgelijkheid
• Monique Granneman: nieuwe partner Abcor
