BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> A ATOM, (stylised) device (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2008] UKIntelP o01108 (18 January 2008) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2008/o01108.html Cite as: [2008] UKIntelP o1108, [2008] UKIntelP o01108 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o01108
Result
Section 5(2)(b): Opposition failed. Section 5(3): Opposition failed. Section 5(4)(a): Opposition failed. Section 56: Opposition failed.
Points Of Interest
Summary
The basis of the opponents’ case was their claim that the stylised cross-bar of the letter A in the applicants’ mark made it similar to their own “tick” or “swoosh” device.
Following a very detailed assessment of the marks and all the relevant factors, and on a global appreciation, the Hearing officer concluded that there was no likelihood of confusion. The Section 5(2)(b) objection failed accordingly. This dissimilarity in the marks effectively decided the matter under Section 5(3), even taking account of the ‘massive’ reputation in the opponents’ mark. Likewise, the use of the mark applied for would not be a misrepresentation such as to result in passing-off and the Section 5(4)(a) objection failed also.
Under Section 56 the Hearing Officer concluded that whilst it was the case that the opponents’ made warranted protection as a well known mark, he could not see that the applicants’ marks had any potential to damage it. The opposition therefore failed on all the grounds on which it had been brought.
