Importance of logo protection - logo Diesel

As early as in 1999, Diesel registered it´s D-logo for clothing in the European Union. When Sprinter Megacentros files its own D-logo in the European Union, Diesel opposes. Initially Diesel’s claim is denied, based on the assumption that the average consumer would not recognize the character D in the logo and see it as a mere trivial shape. Therefore the trademarks are visually, phonetically and conceptually dissimilar.

However, the EU Court disagrees. A substantial part of the public will recognize the character D, despite the fact that the capital letter is incomplete. Therefore, the trademarks are considered similar and the new trademark filing is refused. Especially in fashion, logos are very important. Consumers will see them as a trademark; therefore protection of the logo is at least as important as the protection of the name.

trademark-registration



Latest news
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
Competitor registers domain name
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?