Trademark news

Bad Spaniel's parody or trademark infringement

Internationally, the US Supreme Court's ruling on whether the Bad Spaniel's dog toys infringe on the Jack Daniel's trademark is eagerly awaited. VIP Products makes these chew toys in the shape of famous liquor bottles with similar labels. In the place of 'Jack Daniel's Old no 7' the products now depict 'Bad Spaniel's Old no 2' and '40% alcohol' has been replaced with '43% poop'. » trademarks

Miffy's sex toys

When a logo depicting a stylized rabbit's head is filed in the European Union for clothing and sex toys, Mercis objects. After all, Miffy is known worldwide for its child-friendly innocent image. Miffy has been registered as a figurative trademark in several variations for among others books and clothing, but not for sex toys. For that reason, Mercis also appeals to the notoriety of the character Miffy. » trademarks

Monique Granneman partner Abcor

As of September 1, 2023, Monique Granneman will transfer to Abcor European Trademark and Design Agency. With her arrival, Abcor is even better able to serve the growing customer base. » other-general

MK Michael Kors - cancellation similar trademark

Companies sometimes think they are safe once their trademark is registered and that possible older similar marks can then no longer be a problem. This is not correct. Sometimes a company does not know that a similar mark is registered and only commences an action when confronted with it. Even then, all rights can be asserted. This used to be possible only through the courts, now it is also possible in a simple cancellation procedure with the trademark authorities. » trademarks

Reimbursement Kawasaki-insurance.nl

Often companies forget to include separate clauses in cooperation agreements about the use of trademarks. For example, may a distributor register domain names or social media accounts in which the trademark appears? Should these then be transferred free and immediately if the parties part ways? » internet-online-branding
Our Clients
Follow Abcor
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?