Louis Vuitton’s ‘L.V’: abbreviations can be trademarks too

Louis Vuitton is globally recognized for its iconic pattern, but the name itself is also a widely known trademark.

It is common for brands to register the abbreviation of their brand name. In some cases, brands are even primarily known by their abbreviation, such as automobile manufacturer BMW (Bayerische Motoren Werke AG), online retailer ASOS (As Seen on Screen) and sportswear manufacturer ASICS (Anima Sana In Corpore Sano). Louis Vuitton also registered 'L.V,' an abbreviation frequently seen on their bags and clothing.

This registration proved useful, as Louis Vuitton recently had to take action against a Finnish company that filed a European application for the word mark 'LV' for cleaning products. Is there a risk of confusion?

The European Trademark Office assessed the opposition and found the products of the application to be similar to the products of L.V.  Moreover, the signs consist of the same letters in the same order. The only difference is the dot in Louis Vuitton's older mark. The Finnish company argues that this dot makes a difference in the similarity of the marks, particularly in terms of how the two marks are pronounced. The European Trademark Office rejects this argument, stating that consumers generally do not pronounce punctuation marks (L ‘dot’ V) and also do not pause between the letters because of the dot. Thus, the dot does not make a difference. The defense is dismissed: the signs are conceptually, visually, and even aurally similar.

The Finnish applicant also argues that LV and L.V have coexisted in the market for quite some time without causing any problems. This could suggest that there is no risk of confusion between the marks. However, for this argument to succeed, the Finnish company would need to provide convincing evidence that no confusion existed between the marks for an extended period, which is typically a difficult task. Unfortunately for the Finnish company, this was a step too far: it failed to provide evidence indicating that relevant consumers are accustomed to seeing the applied mark without confusing it with the older Louis Vuitton mark. The trademark office concludes that there is a risk of confusion, and the ‘LV’ application of the Finnish company is rejected.

Author: Erwin Haüer

Bio: Erwin is a trademark attorney and, as the managing partner, in charge of IT and Information Management. He works extensively with startups and scale-ups, while his clientele also includes numerous multinational corporations. Erwin possesses a sharp wit and a keen eye for remarkable trademark news and curious brand infringements.