Trademark news

Competitor registers domain name

The one who first applies for a domain name, gets that domain name. Even if it contains a trademark of another company. Through a UDRP procedure, a trademark holder can fairly easily try to repossess such a domain. With Dutch domain names, you have to prove that the domain name is (virtually) identical, that the defendant has no right of its own pertaining to that name and that the domain name was registered or used in bad faith. » internet-online-branding


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

ANWB: domain names dispute

Within three months, 34 domain names containing the ANWB brand were registered. In case of domain name infringement, there are two options to put a stop to this. Bringing a case to court or starting a simple administrative procedure at WIPO. » internet-online-branding

Amazon liable for third-party sales

Amazon's online platform features a mix of ads. On the one hand, advertisements of products offered by Amazon itself, and on the other, third-party advertisements (the hybrid model). It is unclear whether the products are sold by Amazon or by someone else, because the ads are mixed.Third-party sellers often offer counterfeit products. Amazon takes the position that, as a neutral platform, it is not responsible for this. If infringement is reported, the concerned ads are removed immediately. » internet-online-branding

H&M rubbish featuring Justin Bieber

As a part of Justin Bieber's world tour, H&M launched a hoodie and bag featuring pictures of Justin Bieber. H&M has produced similar lines before. This time however, internal communication and legal checks did not seem to have gone smoothly. » internet-online-branding
page 1
Our Clients
Follow Abcor

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?