UK: New Kids Back On The Block – And Grown Up All Litigious

Daniel Wood, Donald Wahlberg, Jonathan Knight, Jordan Knight, Joseph McIntyre (c/o Cortina Business Management) v SM Productions Partnership

In the matter of CTM Registration No. 4701413 for NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK in the name of SM Productions Partnership and in the matter of application for declaration of invalidity under OHIM reference No. 2944C by "the band members", c/o Cortina Business Management. OHIM Cancellation Division (Ref 2944C) of 04/12/2009. Rebecca Tilbury reports.

OHIM confirms that bad faith is to be assessed at the date the proprietor files the CTM application and that all contractual agreements and evidence pertinent to the case is to be taken into account.

OHIM cancels CTM registration as Intellectual Property rests with the original band members and the economic value of the mark NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK remained high, despite varying activity levels. The registrations were filed in bad faith by US company, SM Productions Partnership.


New Kids on the Block (NKOTB) are an American boy band who enjoyed a phenomenal level of success in the 1980s and 1990s and it is estimated that they have sold 80 million records worldwide. NKOTB was formed in 1984 and produced five albums up until 1991.

The five band members filed a declaration of invalidity on 11/06/2008 against CTM Registration No. 4701413 for NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK covering Classes 9 and 41 which was filed on 4th November 2005. The invalidity action was principally based on the absolute ground under Article 52(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009 on the basis that SM Productions Partnership (the CTM proprietor) was acting in bad faith when it applied to register the trade mark.

Article 52(1)(b) states as follows:

"A Community Trade Mark shall be declared invalid on application to the Office or on the basis of a counterclaim in infringement proceedings, where the applicant was acting in bad faith when it filed the application for the trade mark".

The other grounds upon which the action was based were:

  • CTM was registered in the name of an agent or representative as per Article 53(1)(b) in relation to Article 8(3) – assuming the registration was without proprietors consent and agent/representative cannot justify their actions.
  • CTM was registered in breach of an earlier unregistered right in pursuant to Article 53(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 8(4) – such rights were invoked with regards to the UK (passing off), Germany (a commercial designation under Section 5 of German Trade Mark Act, a names' right under the German Civil Code, a constitutional right to a name, and copyright in the band name).
  • CTM registered in breach of Article 53(2)(c) because it violates the applicants' copyright to a US protected work under the French copyright legislation and in accordance with the Berne Convention. The applicants also invoked French copyright to the logotype, an album title, a song title and lyrics of a song, all containing the words "New Kids on the Block".
  • The applicants also claimed that the mark NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK is entitled to protection as a well-known mark under Article 8(2)(c) as per Paris Convention.

The Case for the Applicants

NKOTB was formed in 1984 by Maurice Star and signed an exclusive production agreement with Big Step Productions (BSP), which was jointly owned by Maurice Starr and Richard Scott. BSP dealt with the commercial affairs of the band, such as negotiation of merchandising licences. In 1992, BSP terminated its contract with the band. The termination allowed for a continuation of the recording and merchandising licences put in place by BSP, involving Scott as a receiver of future licence revenues. But crucially, the termination also included an assignment to all five band members of all BSP rights in and to the band's name and logo including all trade mark and copyright rights. After this termination, NKOTB continued to perform and a sixth album was released by them in 1994.

NKOTB did not produce any further albums before the date of filing of the CTM on 4th November 2005. The artistic body of work which they had created continued to receive exposure on radio and television after the filing date in question because of the fan base and hit records they put into the market and a range of greatest hits albums were produced. NKOTB argued that this exposure continued to generate goodwill under the mark "NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK" which duly accrued to the individual band members as owners of the mark, as well as generation of royalty payments. The television programmes MTV and VH1 tried to reunite the band members and this generated publicity and in or around 2007, the band started come back concerts in the United States.

The CTM proprietor, SM Productions Partnership, principally consisted of partners Richard Scott and Denny Marte. At the time when the application was filed on 4th November 2005, Richard Scott (formerly of BSP) was no doubt aware of the history of the band given his former relationship and indeed the assignment of the IP rights to the individual band members. Just because certain trade mark registrations had lapsed did not mean the abandonment of the band members rights but rather to the contrary, in that the mark "NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK" was still in full commercial use, as evidenced by revenue and royalty payments.

Although the CTM proprietor was never a contracted agent/representative under Article 8(3), Richard Scott did allege in a statement to the USPTO that he was submitting a US application in his own name but on behalf of the individual band members. Thus, the applicants argue that he essentially did the same with regards the CTM registration.

The mark "NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK", the right to which vests in the applicants, argued that this consisted of "more than mere local significance" and thus in connection with the UK, they could prohibit the proprietor under the common law tort of passing off.

The applicants submitted significant evidence showing use of the mark worldwide and in vast areas of the member states of the EU. This evidence included extracts from the fan club website, press articles, royalty payment schedules from Sony BMG and an extract from Wikipedia.

The Case for the Defendants

The CTM proprietor argued that at the time of filing the application for registration, the band had not been active for 11 years and that Richard Scott had sent the attorneys acting for the band a message detailing the filing in the US, thus they argued that they did not have a dishonest intention. The CTM proprietor disputed the statements made by NKOTB, in that the band had ceased to exist in 1994 and had not been promoting itself or recording new material thus they argued that the mark had been long abandoned by the time of filing the CTM application on 4th November 2005. In relation to Article 8 (3), the CTM proprietor argued that they had never been agent or representative and the applicants failed to support this ground through evidence.

In relation to the claim under the tort of passing off, the proprietor made reference to the decision in Star Industrial Co Ltd V Yap Kwee Kor, where the action for passing off was dismissed on a finding that the plaintiff had indeed abandoned its goodwill. The CTM proprietor argued that the vast majority of record sales would have taken place pre-1994 and although in relation to the termination agreement, the clause grants the band all "right" and "interest" in the band's name the word "goodwill" was not present, thus the proprietor argued that this remained with BSP. In relation to the invoked German rights, commercial designation, title rights and rights to a name are all argued by the CTM proprietor to be inapplicable since the applicants had abandoned such rights since 1994. This issue of abandonment was also raised again in relation to the "well known mark" under Article 6bis of the Paris Convention due to the 11 years of non-use, thus this claim should fail.

The Decision

  1. Bad Faith

    Of course, neither the CTM regulation nor the implementing regulation provides any guidance on what the term "bad faith" actually means in the legal sense and in practice. OHIM has indicated that bad faith can be considered to be "dishonesty which would fall short of the standards of acceptable commercial behaviour" which is in line with UK case law. The cancellation division stated that "bad faith generally implies or involves, but is not limited to, actual or constructive fraud, or a design to mislead or deceive another, or any other sinister motive. Conceptually, bad faith can be understood as a dishonest intention".

    Thus, did the applicant at the time the CTM application was filed lack any honest intention?

    In the recent Chocolate Bunny case "Lindt Goldhase", the ECJ decided that "the mere fact that the CTM proprietor, at the time of filing of the contested mark, knew of the earlier use of the same sign by a third party, is not sufficient to constitute bad faith". All other factors pertinent to the case should be taken into account and OHIM decided that the argument put forward by the proprietor relating to the phrase "any and all right, title and interest" was a "twisted construction" because it was contrary to any normal reading of the phrase.

    OHIM concluded that the termination contract contained explicitly clear and unambiguous textual content and the economic interests of the band in the name NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK were prevalent at the time when the CTM proprietor filed the application, thus there was no question that they had shown their entitlement to make use of the ground Article 52(1)(b).

    Richard Scott, a former shareholder of BSP, had definite knowledge of the earlier use made of the mark by the five band members and the commercial use through merchandising and royalty payments. It was not disputed that this knowledge was with the proprietor when the CTM application was filed

    OHIM detailed that Richard Scott, as a share holder of BSP, should be viewed as having had a post-contractual relationship with the band members, not least because at the time of the termination of the contract, Scott remained as a perpetual receiver of license revenues from record sales and merchandise thus he was "in a position where a high degree of attentiveness and precaution should have been present in order not to harm the interests of the applicants".
  2. Economic Value of the Sign

    The fact that the CTM proprietor actually submitted the CTM application for "NEW KIDS ON THE BLOCK" is a high indication that it was aware of the remaining economic value of the sign, given that the reunion attempts created public interest and the evidence put forward by the applicants highlighted that there was and is a substantial degree of recognition and recollection by people of the band name, thus a new band with the same name would have taken advantage of the public resonance with the sign. Thus, the conclusion is twofold:

    1. clear indication of existing goodwill of the sign; and
    2. CTM proprietor must have known that the rights vested with the applicants, due to the clear wording of the termination agreement.

    The fact that the proprietor contacted the attorney for the band members and advised of the US trade mark application does not conclude that consent was given and if the proprietor had been interested in instigating formal negotiations to use the band name then a meeting should have occurred with all five band members, not just allegedly one band member Donald Wahlberg.

    The band enjoyed massive commercial success in the late 1980s and early 1990s with more than 30 million records sold, which OHIM detailed as a "phenomenon out of the ordinary". At the time the proprietor filed the CTM application, the mark had considerable economic potential and because of the historical connections which the proprietor had with the band and also the music industry, they would have readily known this.

    "CTM proprietor's sole aim in taking advantage of the rights conferred by the CTM constitute an unfair act in relation to the applicants and the legal protection still valid for the mark "New Kids on the Block"".


OHIM confirmed that no aspects of the case indicated a legitimate interest or objective of the proprietor and thus revoked the mark in its entirety in accordance with Article 52(1)(b) on the basis of bad faith. Because the CTM was declared invalid on this ground, OHIM did not provide guidance in relation to the other grounds.

In accordance with Article 85(1) and Rule 94, the CTM proprietor was ordered to bear the fees and costs of the other party.

This decision confirms the approach to be taken when looking into issues concerning bad faith and the meaning of bad faith. This decision affirmed the decision of the ECJ in Lindt that the relevant date for determining bad faith is the date of filing of the application in question. This decision also confirms that historical information regarding contracts and evidence of use of the mark to establish goodwill is crucial for OHIM to assess the merits of the ground properly.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.