Home
Our team
»
FAQ
»
Publications
»
IP Quiz
»
Our Services
Trademark news
Max Verstappen still loses to Picnic

Max Verstappen still loses to Picnic

As an introduction of the brand Picnic, the company launched a viral parody of the Jumbo commercials featuring Max Verstappen. Celebrities popularity can be monetized. For that reason Max started legal proceedings against this use. Court agreed with Max and sentenced Picnic to total damages of € 150,000. » advertising-law
Kingsday 2020: Balcony day

Kingsday 2020: Balcony day

Not only King's Day (a Dutch national holiday celebrating the birthday of the sovereign) celebrations were limited this year, also the number of follow-on advertising campaigns was scarce. Question is: what is actually allowed? A good example of this is the Balcony day! campaign sponsored by Ticketswap! The campaign calls for people us to raise their glass on their balconies (so at home, maintaining social distance) in honor of our King. The four most beautiful photos could win a TicketSwap voucher. The face in the advertisement resembles that of our King. Is this allowed? » advertising-law
Meat is for men, vegetables are for cows

Meat is for men, vegetables are for cows

Humor is not equally appreciated by everyone. After the riot with Jan Kooijman, sauce maker Remia is back on the game with its BBQ sauce advertisement. On the label of “Black Jack Smokey BBQ sauce” is stated: "For real men only" and "Real men, real meat, real sauce ... Meat is for men, vegetables for cows!" A complaint is made on grounds of gender discrimination and offensiveness to vegetarians and vegans. The statement is therefore offensive and in violation of Articles 2 and 4 of the dutch media code, so it must be prohibited. » advertising-law
Misleading advertising Lidl, claim based on own press release

Misleading advertising Lidl, claim based on own press release

Comparative advertising is allowed. Stronger still: comparative advertising should be considered a good thing. By comparative advertising consumers are better informed of the existence of equivalent alternatives. This allows for more competition, thus enabling consumers to purchase comparable products at a better price. Comparative advertising is therefore used to position private label products alongside premium brands. Lidl makes frequent use of this. However, there is a limit, as Lidl experienced with their “Cien Cellular beauty facial cream” campaign. » advertising-law
Discarded donkeys and delicate children

Discarded donkeys and delicate children's hearts

On TV the most horrifying images can be seen on a daily basis, violence and aggression alr also commonly seen in games. However, there are quite strict rules to ensure that the delicate child's soul does is not confronted with the rough realities of life. » advertising-law
« Previous
page 3
Next »
Our Clients
ABCHronicle
Abcors ABChronicle no 50 Abcors ABChronicle no 50
Read this issue online »
Subscribe to newsletter »
Follow Abcor
IP Quiz
claimant
defendant
claimant
defendant

IP quiz Trademarks

Puma is one of the bigger sports and lifestyle brands in the world. The core-business is the design, development and sale of (sports) shoes, (sports) clothing and accessories. In 1960, Puma registered an international trademark for a device designed in 1958: the formstrip. Since then, Puma has registered approximately 90 formstrip trademarks with validity in the Benelux or the European Union. Puma claims that this is a serial mark. Monshoe is a wholesaler of women's shoes and related products. The company designs and develops Monshoe shoes which it largely markets itself. Monshoe sells its women's shoes under the brands Shoecolate and Pearlz. The shoe Shoecolate is offered in various colour combinations. Puma claims that Monshoe infringes its well-known formstrip trademark. Monshoe contradicts this and states that the average consumer will not perceive the device of Monshoe on the sneakers as a trademark. And if the public will recognize a trademark in the decoration, it will not make the connection to Puma. According to Monshoe, the formstrip logo is not a well-known trademark within the meaning of the BVIE and the UMVo. There is no likelihood of confusion because the sign does not or hardly evoke any association with Puma among the public. In light of the above, who is right? Does this constitute decorative use or linking to a well-known trademark?
Play the quiz
»