Queengarden motorbike infringement of European design Honda

Until a few years ago design law was of minor importance in the Benelux. Those days are over now. Over the last few years multiple decisions have been issued based on registered EU designs, like in this Honda case. Honda has protected the shape of its HONDA MSX125 as a registered EU-design. A Belgian distributor introduces a similar design on the market and the case is taken to court.

The judge defines the relevant audience does not merely consist of professional traders, but of motorcycle affectionates as well. In addition, there is a lot of room for creative freedom. The Honda motorcycle has numerous characteristic features like its stretched saddle, the exhaust pipe just below the saddle, the angular shape of the headlight and its side pieces. All these specific features have been copied, resulting in the same overall impression. So further sales are prohibited by court-order and the decision is accompanied by a penalty payment to the sum of one million Euros. (Image EUIPO database)

design-law

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?