Good news for the FA that has nothing to do with Messers Rooney or Owen.
At the end of April, the FA defeated an opposition to register the ‘three lions’ shield, together with the words THE FA for a wide range of goods and services.
The FA applied to register a mark consisting of the England ‘three lions’ shield, with the words ‘The FA’ in a black box above the shield for a wide range of goods. Henkel opposed the application in relation to goods in Classes 3 (toiletries etc), 5 (medicated toiletries etc) and 21 (items related to cleaning of the body and hygiene etc), based on its UK registration of the word Fa in the UK in those classes.
The opposition was refused:
*Henkel’s mark benefited from enhanced distinctiveness. Henkel claimed that the mark was well known in Europe, but the hearing officer found that reputation in Europe was not relevant before the UK Trade Marks Registry. Even if it had been, Henkel had not submitted sufficient evidence to show reputation in any particular country, let alone the whole of Europe. However, the Fa mark was inherently distinctive for the goods in question.
*The Football Association could not benefit from its reputation in relation to football for the goods under attack in Classes 3, 5 and 21.
*Certain of the challenged goods were identical and some were merely similar. The hearing officer proceeded on the basis of an assessment of the likelihood of confusion in relation to the goods which were identical, on the basis that if there was no confusion in relation to the identical goods, there could be no confusion in relation to the similar goods.
*The average consumer would not dissect the Football Association’s mark into its verbal and figurative components. The word ‘The’ would be dismissed as non-distinctive, but the shield element would retain its distinctiveness, even when the entire mark was reduced in size. In fact, when the mark was reduced in size, it was the verbal element that became difficult for consumers to make out. Thus, the marks were visually or aurally quite different.
*Henkel’s mark had no conceptual meaning. On the other hand, the word element of the Football Association’s mark would be seen as referred to the first or original football association, and device mark would be seen as representing England.
*As a result, on a global appreciation, the marks were not similar enough to lead to confusion and the opposition failed.
The IPKat reckons that at first it sounds a bit odd to say that reputation in Europe doesn’t give enhanced protection since we are part of Europe, but on reflection, it’s the only answer than can be right if reputation in the UK hasn’t been made out.
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html