Ressurection of the Theatre Group Amsterdam

In 2018, Toneelgroep Amsterdam merged into Internationaal Theater Amsterdam (ITA). When the theatre group De Warme Winkel decides to change its name to Toneelgroep Amsterdam, ITA does not approve.


While the conflict is fought out through the media, ITA quickly files an application to have their former name trademarked. This causes theatre group De Warme Winkel to surrender the name change.

Should there be a change of name, register your former company or organization name as a trademark. This way, you can prohibit third parties from using a similar name for the next 5 years to come.


Latest news
The Oscars: A vibrant trademark
Abcor ranking IP STARS
Abcor ranked again in WTR1000
Issues of (semi) descriptive trademarks
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?