Trademark disputes can take years to resolve, and the cases between Lacoste and Crocodile International show how different courts can reach different conclusions on similar issues. While both cases involved the same brands and similar arguments, the legal outcomes in the Philippines and India highlight how trademark law can be interpreted differently depending on jurisdiction.
Philippines: Crocodile Wins After 20 Years
Crocodile International has won a long-running trademark case against Lacoste in the Philippines, bringing an end to a dispute that lasted two decades. The case focused on whether Crocodile International’s left-facing crocodile logo was too similar to Lacoste’s well-known right-facing crocodile.
The Case
Lacoste, a French brand recognized for its crocodile logo, had been present in the Philippines since 1963. The brand argued that allowing Crocodile International to use its own crocodile emblem would cause consumer confusion and dilute Lacoste’s trademark rights.
Crocodile International countered by pointing out that its branding strategy differs across markets. In countries like Japan and South Korea, it has coexisted with Lacoste without legal disputes. This argument supported its position, as it suggested that consumers in other regions could distinguish between the two brands without confusion.
Court Decision
On August 30, 2024, the Philippine Supreme Court put an end to the dispute, agreeing with the lower courts that Crocodile International’s logo was different enough to avoid confusion. The court found that the distinctions between the two logos, including their orientation and design details, were enough to make them recognizable as separate brands.
India: Lacoste Wins After 23 Years
While Crocodile International succeeded in the Philippines, it faced a different outcome in India, where the courts ruled in favour of Lacoste after 23 years of litigation.
The Case
Lacoste sued Crocodile International in 2001, saying that its logo was too similar to Lacoste’s. Lacoste, with its crocodile logo since 1927, claimed that the Crocodile’s logo was an infringement. Crocodile International argued that it had rights through a 1952 registration and a 1983 agreement, but Lacoste argued that it had prior rights in India.
Court Decision
On August 14, 2024, the Delhi High Court ruled in Lacoste’s favor. The court determined that Crocodile International’s logo was too similar to Lacoste’s and could cause confusion among consumers. Additionally, the court dismissed Crocodile International’s copyright claims, stating that minor variations in design did not make the logos distinct enough to justify separate protection.
Another key factor in the ruling was the interpretation of the 1983 agreement. The court found that this agreement did not grant Crocodile International trademark rights in India, highlighting Lacoste’s position that it had the stronger claim to the crocodile logo in the country.
Conclusion
These cases illustrate how trademark disputes can lead to different outcomes depending on the jurisdiction.
- In the Philippines, Crocodile International won by proving that its logo was distinct enough from Lacoste’s, even after years of legal challenges. The courts found that the differences in design and branding strategies were enough to avoid consumer confusion.
- In India, Lacoste prevailed by showing that Crocodile International’s logo was too similar and that previous agreements did not apply to the Indian market. The court illustrated the principle that a brand’s long-standing use of a trademark can outweigh later registrations if the likelihood of confusion is high.
These cases highlight the importance of understanding local trademark laws and judicial interpretations. The same dispute can have different results depending on how a country evaluates similarity, prior use, and agreements. For brands, this reinforces the need for strong legal strategies to protect trademarks in different markets.
Sources:
World Trademark Review. (2024, September 17). Lacoste wins long-standing trademark infringement battle. Retrieved from https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/article/lacoste-wins-long-standing-trademark-infringement-battle-the-delhi-high-court
Insider Retail. (2024, September 17). Which is which? Lacoste loses 20-year trademark battle with Crocodile. Retrieved from https://insideretail.asia/2024/09/17/which-is-which-lacoste-loses-20-year-trademark-battle-with-crocodile/