Not every tiger is the same. That is the conclusion that can be drawn from the recent decision of OHIM’s Opposition Division.
The German company Eckes-Granini, known for its juices, filed an opposition against Tigger (left) in class 32. Tigger was filed by Disney and concerns of course the tiger figuring in the Winnie The Pooh books and movies (not the least tiger!).
The OHIM compared the tigers but was far from convinced that they are similar. One tiger is black/white, the other in color. The tigers have different eyes, a different nose, a different pattern. In short, the tigers are visually different. On the other hand, both marks share a conceptually identity: both are tigers with a “comic book look”. The overall impression differs however, so risk of confusion is not given.
The argument that the tiger forms a part of a series of trademarks (which increases the confusion) has no effect. Firstly, there is no conclusive evidence presented for the presence of the series of marks. Secondly, there still must be a common similarity between the series of marks and the disputed trademark, which is not at hand.
Share this post
“Trademark protection gives freedom to do business.”