JOHN IS ON – ON LEMON persistence

To prevent third parties from using the name and heritage of John Lennon, Yoko Ono has registered the name as a trademark. The word mark JOHN LENNON is registered for a wide range of goods and services, including soft drinks. When soft drinks are offered using the name JOHN LEMON, advertised depicting, inter alia, the iconic glasses of John Lennon, she objects successfully. The parties reach a settlement. The soft drink is renamed, holding sufficient distance from the name John Lennon.

Less than one month later, the drink is relaunched under the new name ON LEMON - JOHN IS ON. To promote the soft drink, the old name is used occasionally on Facebook and Instagram, as well as on shipping boxes. Is this infringement? Yes it is. The names JOHN LEMON and JOHN LENNON are similar and are used for identical products. In addition, the new brand ON LEMON - JOHN IS ON is similar to the infringing JOHN LEMON and is used in combination with it. It is precisely because of that persistence that the new trademark is not allowed. A European-wide ban follows.

trademarks



Latest news
Rituals vs. The Body Shop: Battle of the Brands
The Bulldog rightly claims damages from Red Bull
Trademark Escobar parfum contrary to public order
Abcor team in World Trademark Review 1000
Louis Keijzer passes BBMM exam with flying colours
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?