Companies come up with original names, beautiful logos, and of course original, eye-catching designs to distinguish themselves. As the saying goes: if you want to attract attention, you will have to stand out from the crowd. Also, an attractive design will lead to more customers.

The new branding of airline company Lufthansa meant a switch from the familiar yellow-blue to white-blue. This new corporate identity was not welcomed by everyone with enthusiasm. According to the Polish airline LOT there is a risk of confusion with its white-blue logo and aircraft tail. The European Trademarks Office disagreed and ruled that there is only a conceptual similarity, which is insufficient to assume likelihood of confusion. The opposition from the Polish airline was rejected. You can find more information about this in our earlier blog post: A Tale of Two Tails.

While EU trademark law lacks a precise definition of bad faith, recent case law from the European Court of Justice clarified the interpretation. Aiming for consistency across Europe, a new common approach for IP Offices of EU Member States is introduced to address bad faith in trademark applications: Convergence Program 13 or simply CP13.

There is a current trend towards granting legal personality to nature. The idea is that this makes it possible to grant nature rights that can be explicitly taken into account when decisions are being made, or even enforced on nature’s behalf. This is already happening in Spain, where the Mar Menor lagoon has acquired legal personality. In the Netherlands, a politician has started lobbying to grant rights to Limburg’s hilly landscape.

A Japanese economist by the name of Yoshida recently published a calculation showing that subject to certain conditions and assumptions, everyone in Japan will have Sato as their last name by 2531. Why? Well, Japan is the only country in the world where spouses must have the same last name. Yoshida raised the issue − with success − to draw attention to what he considers to be an outdated law.

Back in the day, trademark applications in bad faith used to be a common occurrence in China, but this amount seems to have declined by recent more stringent Chinese legislation. Western brands stood for quality and status, and what could be easier than copying such established trademarks? Although it was very clear that the parties weren’t the rightful owners of the copied trademark, this still often happened.

Trademark cases can become deeply personal, and a recent Cancellation action before the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) regarding the ‘Rubettes’ trademark is a striking example of this. The Rubettes are an English pop/glam rock band that achieved significant success with “Sugar Baby Love.” However, their history since then has been marked by conflicts within the band and legal battles. In 1999, Bill Hurd, one of the original founding members, established a separate band using the name “The Rubettes.” This led to litigation in the United Kingdom between him and Alan Williams (lead singer), which was settled in 2002.

Kwantum, a Dutch retail chain specializing in home furnishings and decorations known for its affordable prices, introduced a new, furry mirror. The ‘Teddy Wave’ mirror, with its wavy shape and soft frame of teddy-bear fabric, bears a suspicious resemblance to exclusive designer mirrors that costs much, much more. A lyrical client shared the tip on her TikTok account, and the video of the mirror was viewed more than a million times within a day.

It sounds like a picaresque novel, a small snack bar in Zeeland hindering a major American fast food chain’s plans to open up in Benelux, but it does show just how important trademark registration can be. If Wendy’s snack bar had not been registered in Benelux, it would never have had the power to exclude American Wendy’s from the region.

Obelix, Asterix’s best friend, is one of the main characters in the Asterix comic books. The Asterix & Obelix series is popular all over the world and has been translated into many languages. There is a huge range of Asterix merchandise: mugs, bags and wigs to name a few. There’s even an Asterix theme park in France. We’ll start with a spoiler: the fate of our comic hero Obelix takes a turn for the worse in this blog.

When is a name truly descriptive from a legal standpoint, rendering it ineligible for registration? The British clothing brand SUPERDRY, known for its vintage Americana style with Japanese graphics, recently found out. The European Trademark Office rejected the SUPERDRY trademark for most of the products and services for which the application was filed. The Office ruled that SUPERDRY means 'remarkably free of moisture’ and is descriptive, thus lacking distinctiveness.

Exclusive, expensive, coveted. Words that aptly describe the products of the Hermès brand. This fashion house is particularly renowned for its handbags (the Birkin bag being a prime example) and scarves. Luxury goods with a luxurious appeal. It's imperative that the exclusivity and reputation of the brand must be fiercely protected.

Puma registered the design of its Creeper shoe in 2016 with a view to obtaining the exclusive rights to it. J van Hilst (HJVH) scuppered their plans by filing a revocation action claiming that the Creeper shoe did not meet the novelty requirement because Rihanna had worn an identical design in an Instagram photo taken a year earlier. By law, any design application must be both novel and must differ in overall impression from other designs in the market. The novelty requirement stipulates that the design, or a closely similar one, must not have been made public on the date of the application

Charity and Trademark Law

A banana slip