Browse All Content

  • POLO v. POLO REALE: A Closer Look at the EU Trademark Opposition

    POLO v. POLO REALE: A Closer Look at the EU Trademark Opposition

    On April 7, 2025, the Opposition Division of the European Union Intellectual Property Office delivered a significant ruling in a dispute between The Polo/Lauren Company L.P., the renowned American luxury brand, and Prime Cotton FZ-LCC from the UAE. The opposition concerned trademark application No 18 979 833 for the ‘POLO REALE’ figurative mark. This ruling…

    Read more…


  • Lost International v. Lady Gaga: A Trademark Infringement Dispute over “Mayhem”

    Lost International v. Lady Gaga: A Trademark Infringement Dispute over “Mayhem”

    The case of Lost International v. Lady Gaga, pending before the United States District Court for the Central District of California, centres on allegations of trademark infringement involving the use of the mark “Mayhem.” The plaintiff, a long-established surf and lifestyle brand, asserts that Lady Gaga’s commercial use of the word “Mayhem” in connection with…

    Read more…


  • Dior’s Victory: EUIPO Rejects CRISPY DYOR Following Opposition

    Dior’s Victory: EUIPO Rejects CRISPY DYOR Following Opposition

    On 25 March 2025, the EUIPO confirmed Christian Dior Couture’s challenge by rejecting the application for CRISPY DYOR in its entirety. The decision was based solely on the similarities between the contested word mark and Dior’s established figurative mark, rather than on any reputation-based arguments. The contested sign covered jewellery and clothing, which were found…

    Read more…


  • Supreme Wins EUIPO Opposition Against ‘Supins’ Mark

    Supreme Wins EUIPO Opposition Against ‘Supins’ Mark

    Supreme has succeeded in a recent trademark opposition before the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), securing a full rejection of a rival application that bore similarities to its well-known branding. On 8 April 2025, the EUIPO’s Opposition Division ruled in favour of Chapter 4 Corp., the owner of the Supreme brand, in a case…

    Read more…


  • Chanel’s “N° 5” v M5: How Close Is Too Close?

    Chanel’s “N° 5” v M5: How Close Is Too Close?

    In a decision issued on 20 March 2025 by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), a dispute between Chanel and the Slovenian company Simb d.o.o., over its “m5” trademark, highlighted the fine line between brand identity and imitation in the beauty industry. The case focused on a figurative trademark applied for by Simb d.o.o.,…

    Read more…


  • Mercedes-Benz Off-Road Logo Fails Trade Mark Test in EUIPO

    Mercedes-Benz Off-Road Logo Fails Trade Mark Test in EUIPO

    On 19 March 2025, the General Court of the European Union ruled in Case T-400/24, rejecting Mercedes-Benz Group AG’s application to register a figurative trade mark representing an ascending off-road vehicle. The decision, based on Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001, confirmed that the mark lacked distinctive character and could not be registered. Background to…

    Read more…


  • Patagonia Takes Legal Action Against Marden’s Over Counterfeit Goods

    Patagonia Takes Legal Action Against Marden’s Over Counterfeit Goods

    Patagonia Inc. filed a lawsuit on March 18, 2025, against Marden’s, a discount retail chain in Maine, alleging trademark counterfeiting, trademark infringement, unfair competition, dilution, and copyright infringement. The complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maine, claims that Marden’s has been selling counterfeit Patagonia-branded jackets featuring unauthorised reproductions of…

    Read more…


  • Richemont Fails to Prove Parasitism as Court Sides with Louis Vuitton

    Richemont Fails to Prove Parasitism as Court Sides with Louis Vuitton

    On March 5, 2025, the French Court of Cassation ruled in favour of Louis Vuitton, dismissing an appeal brought by Richemont, the owner of Van Cleef & Arpels. The dispute centered on allegations that Louis Vuitton’s Color Blossom jewellery collection unfairly imitated Van Cleef & Arpels’ renowned Alhambra design. The court upheld previous rulings that…

    Read more…


  • Glashütter Uhrenbetrieb GmbH vs. EUIPO: Glashütte ORIGINAL’s Trademark Rejection Explained

    Glashütter Uhrenbetrieb GmbH vs. EUIPO: Glashütte ORIGINAL’s Trademark Rejection Explained

    On December 11, 2024, the First Chamber of the General Court issued a significant ruling in a trademark dispute involving Glashütter Uhrenbetrieb GmbH in Glashütte, Germany, and the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). The core of the case revolves around the company’s application to register a figurative trademark for Glashütte ORIGINAL. However, the application faced…

    Read more…


  • Kokito I Punt vs.  The French Football Federation: General Court Rules on Trademark Dispute

    Kokito I Punt vs.  The French Football Federation: General Court Rules on Trademark Dispute

    On January 15, 2025, the Third Chamber of the General Court delivered a pivotal ruling in the trademark dispute between Kokito I Punt, SL and the Fédération Française de Football (FFF). The case revolves around a trademark application featuring a stylized rooster submitted by Kokito I Punt, SL. The FFF raised objections, claiming the rooster…

    Read more…


  • Adidas vs Fashion Nova: The Fight Over Stripes Returns to Court

    Adidas vs Fashion Nova: The Fight Over Stripes Returns to Court

    Adidas has taken legal action against Fashion Nova for allegedly violating a 2022 settlement agreement over the sportswear giant’s famous Three Stripe trademark. The lawsuit, filed on March 4, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, accuses Fashion Nova of breach of contract, trademark infringement, counterfeiting, dilution, and unfair competition.…

    Read more…


  • Hermès’ “H” in Question: The Legal Standard for Genuine Use

    Hermès’ “H” in Question: The Legal Standard for Genuine Use

    Hermès International, known for its luxury goods, sought to protect its figurative trademark through an International Registration designating the EU. This trademark covers a range of items in Class 25, including clothing, footwear, and accessories. The application was made on September 8, 2016, but the situation turned into a legal tug-of-war when Markus Bennemann filed…

    Read more…


  • Beverly Hills Polo Club vs. Amazon: Court Orders Nearly $39M in Damages

    Beverly Hills Polo Club vs. Amazon: Court Orders Nearly $39M in Damages

    The High Court of Delhi has ruled in Lifestyle Equities CV & Anr. vs Amazon Technologies, Inc., exposing how e-commerce giants leverage marketplace dominance at the expense of brand owners. Amazon was found to have used a logo infringing upon the Beverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC) trademark, leading to a permanent injunction and substantial damages.…

    Read more…


  • Louis Vuitton v. Warner Bros.: Trademark Protection vs. Creative Expression

    Louis Vuitton v. Warner Bros.: Trademark Protection vs. Creative Expression

    On December 22, 2011, Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. filed a lawsuit against Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. following the release of The Hangover: Part II. The dispute centered around the use of a travel bag in the film, which Louis Vuitton argued was a counterfeit version of its signature Toile Monogram design. The bag, produced by…

    Read more…