In this article, we discuss two recent trade mark issues.
CARTIER
The reference is Societe CARTIER International AG v Goussin Jeweler LTD, No. RG 22/10833.
The parties
The French luxury goods company, Cartier, filed trade mark infringement proceedings with the Paris Judicial Court against a jewellery company called Goussin Ltd.
A whole lotta love
Image credit: Cartier
The complaint was that Goussin was selling a copycat version of Cartier's Love bracelet. The allegation was that Goussin's copycat product made use of trade marks that were similar to Cartier's word trade mark for LOVE and a stylised version (both registered trade marks). Cartier claimed both trade mark infringement and passing-off.
The response
Goussin argued that everyone uses the word 'LOVE' in the context of fashion and jewellery and that no one would see the word as an indicator of origin or as a trade mark. Au contraire, they would see LOVE as being no more than a 'message of mood' (slightly lost in translation, but you know what they mean!) Goussin also argued that the difference in price between a Cartier and Goussin bracelet is so great that there simply couldn't be a likelihood of confusion.
The Paris Judicial Court
The Paris Judicial Court sided with Cartier, saying that Goussin had infringed Cartier's trade mark rights. The court held as follows:
- Brand identifier: The court needed no convincing that Cartier had used LOVE as a trade mark, in other words, as a brand identifier rather than as a 'decorative or descriptive term'.
- Similarity: There was considerable similarity between the products, and this would increase the likelihood of confusion.
- Misleading claims: There had been unfair competition, with Goussin having made misleading claims by falsely advertising its bracelets as being patented, plated with 18k gold, and made in France.
- Unfair competition: These misleading claims gave Goussin an undue competitive advantage, and this amounted to unfair competition.
As for reparations, the Paris Judicial Court ruled as follows:
- Damages: The court ordered Goussin to pay €10.950 for trade mark infringement, €8.000 for moral damages resulting from trade mark dilution, and €5.000 for unfair competition damages.
- Injunction: Cartier was granted a permanent injunction, barring Goussin from using the term 'Love' as a brand identifier.
- Disclosure: Goussin was ordered to disclose distribution and supply chain details to Cartier regarding the infringing products.
- Publication: The court did, however, cut Goussin some slack by refusing Cartier's request that there be 'a publicized ruling in newspapers and online platforms'.
Michelle Obama
Moving on to something quite different, but continuing with the love theme, we discuss a trade mark matter affecting a woman that many people love, Michelle Obama.
According to a report in the Daily Mail, Michelle Obama has a new podcast called "IMO". But there's already a podcast in the UK called In My Opinion. The UK-based podcast may sound like it's quite small fry – it's three UK-based friends with everyday names, Uzoma, DT and Mulinde, just talking about stuff and with an audience of some 226,000. Very sensibly, the podcasters already have a UK trade mark registration for the name In My Opinion.
The podcast is causing confusion
The UK podcasters have now asked the former first lady very nicely if she might possibly consider calling her podcast something other than IMO. Why? Because IMO is apparently causing 'unnecessary confusion', and it even has the power to 'drown out' their hard work.
Not so popular
Besides that, we're told that 'Michelle Obama's numbers have shocked some social media users', but not in a good way. As one person colourfully put it (again in the Daily Mail): 'I could upload a video of me picking my nose and get more views.'
It happens to the best of us – one day, you wake up and realise that you're no longer relevant!
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.
