We refer to the below Blog entry today from one of the Kats entitled “When trade mark litigation will cost you Deer”.
We are the solicitors acting for Cath Kidston Limited, the defendant and Part 20 counterclaimant in the proceedings referred to in the Blog entry. Our client has prepared the following statement which may be reproduced by yourselves:
“Cath Kidston Ltd does not believe that there are any substantial similarities between its 2012 Christmas deer image and Babycham’s trade mark. We have been advised that Babycham’s action is without merit. We will fight these claims accordingly. As the matter is being litigated, we can make no further comment at this time”.
This Kat would not wish to perturb the machinery of justice in any way and is currently restraining Merpel from running a poll so as to ascertain whether readers would regard the page from the Cath Kidston Christmas catalogue (above) as infringing the claimants' mark (the exact form of which he could not verify online this evening since the UK IPO's usually excellent trade mark search facility was non-functioning). He's not sure how much longer he can restrain her, but he has at least relented and let her chant her favourite Valentine's Day poem since it's about deer. It goes like this:
A thousand years ago
Not very far from here,
A man with powder in his gun
Set forth to hunt the deer.
But things have changed so much today,
There's quite a different plan.
The "dear", with powder on her nose
Goes forth to hunt the man.