No report on BAILII or elsewhere yet but the Telegraph reports
that the High Court (Birss J) has held that the American company
infringed the shirtmaker's CTM. Pink v Pink for very similar goods -
with evidence of customers trying to return the defendant's products to
the claimant's shops - should be an open-and-shut case. What's hard to
understand is how the defendants could have imagined it was a good idea
to try to come to Europe with a trade mark that so clearly conflicted
with an existing one - did they think their product was sufficiently
different, or did they just not do a clearance search? Or is it just
arrogance, of which there is too much in the trade mark world?
Thomas Pink Ltd v Victoria's Secret UK Ltd [2014] EWHC 2631 (Ch)
Thomas Pink Ltd v Victoria's Secret UK Ltd [2014] EWHC 2631 (Ch)
No comments:
Post a Comment