zuricity wrote:^^^^^^
if you are referring to the case that i quoted, in which the firm won. There is a similarity because of the URL names the accused made up. Also, the accused failed to respond - completely .
However i fail to see how a logo as used on the City shirts, with three words on three separate lines looks anything like a logo of one word with the registered trademark ® in it. How any one can confuse two entirely different markets, the beer industry and naff clothing.
Furthermore the beer logo clearly identifies a type of beer , whereas the other logo can be stamped on any type of naff cloth design. Just like adidas do. Did adidas sue the company selling similar abibas cheap and poor material products ?
The major questions are , why are they not going after Asahi ? Why now of all times ?
No, I'm referring to this specific case.
If Asahi had created promotional umbrellas or flip-flops with Asahi Super 'Dry' written on them as a promotional giveaway, I'm sure they'd try to go after them directly, as that would likewise create (in a lawyer's eyes, at least) "circumstances likely to cause confusion". We signed the contract to put the brand on our shirts, therefore we're the most obvious party to go after in a scenario like this. A combination of the words 'Super' and 'Dry' is simply too common for Superdry to have a universal trademark claim, but they will be able to claim it for a certain domain, i.e. clothing and apparel (similar to 'Air' with Nike - they can't go after airlines, but would certainly be able to go after Ronhill if they started a 'Ronhill Air' marque, and probably even a non-running company, like Billabong or Jimmy Choo).
I agree - due to the logo design - that it's speculative at best, and in a worst-case scenario for us would probably involve a re-arrangement of the logo and a token payment of damages.
However, I don't understand this 'Why now of all times?' line-of-thinking. I'd really like someone to propose a 'window' where this kind of claim would be suitable to make: it seems to have become a go-to argument for conspiracy theorists during and in the run-up to:
The transfer window (most of summer)
The start of the season (Aug and Sept)
The crunch CL ties (Oct and Nov)
The heavy Christmas schedule (Dec and Jan)
CL knockouts (Feb to end of season)
The league run-in (late March to May)
Final games (the remainder of May)
End-of-season celebrations (June)
Also add to that 'right at the start/end of an international break' and individual key fixtures that happen throughout the season, and it seems to me that 95%+ of the year is an inopportune time.
Would you like to say when, amongst all that, it would be least 'against us' for some negative news to come out?
"Ferguson. Žvaka kurac."
(Ferguson. Chewing-gum cock.)
Old man in a bar in rural Bosnia.
