Community Design registration protection against imitation

The Tri Tennis Wall is a tennis practice wall, which shows a tennis court on the fabric side of the device. Van Spaendonck is the creator and producer. In order to protect his rights, he registered his product as a European design in 2003. Because the product is a success, the idea arises to market and sell the product abroad. In consultation with China Commodoties the possibilities for this were explored in 2009. However, ultimately the inventor decided to back out of the negotiations.

In 2010 China Commodoties introduces its own wall on the market. The product is markedly similar to that of Van Spaendonckseems. Van Spaendonck start of a procedure and based on its design registration and is awarded with a European wide ban.

First, the question whether the model is valid, because there are older tennis practice walls. The court finds that the overall impression of the new tennis wall is completely different. The claimant has therefore a valid design registration. The tennis wall that China Commodoties delivers is almost identical, so that tennis wall is a violation.

design-law



Latest news
Hakuna matata and colonialism
Trademark BIG MAC not used ???
Abcor recommended as Dutch experts in the field of Intellectual Property Law
Scent marks & non traditional trademarks
Fees for Filing and Renewal of Trademarks in the Benelux about to change!
claimant
defendant
claimant
defendant

PURE - MENTOS

MENTOS has been selling chewing gum under the name MENTOS PURE FRESH for several years. In order to protect her rights MENTOS has registered the following trademarks: the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH, the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH 3 and a figurative depiction of the word PURE. Defendant sells chewing gum under the trademark DENTYNE PURE and has registered its logo as a trademark. Infringement or not?
Follow Abcor