New Edition: Brand Matters - UK IP Environment Update

The latest edition of Brand Matters is out now, covering the key developments shaping the landscape for brand owners in the UK. 🔶 New major design law and practise consultation explained by Nina O'Sullivan, Sally Britton and Lewis Cohen 🔶 Supreme Court confirms role of post-sale confusion in trade mark cases. Learn more from Peter Nunn 🔶 Following the SkyKick judgment, Dominic Walsh details the UKIPO's much anticipated trade mark specification guidance 🔶 UK retail pricing: Key changes to the Price Marking Order delayed until April 2026, by Alexa Lamont 🔶 Sour grapes: Cassandra Hill explores what happens when imported wine labels cross more than just borders 🔶 Tote-ally gone: when bona vacantia bags your brand rights by Cassandra Hill 🔶 Chanelle Cattin breaks down updated CMA guidance on collaboration between businesses 🔶 Elliot Moss is joined by Kimaï co-founder Sidney Neuhaus for a recent episode of Jazz Shapers Read the full publication including editor's note from Sally Britton here: https://lnkd.in/eaVVCJeX

Check out our most recent edition of Brand Matters, offering some useful insights in the UK's ever changing IP landscape.

You know how dinner time inevitably turns into IP discussion time in my house? Last night it happened again... cornflake coated chicken in the airfryer was 'chef's kiss'. But not as exciting as this sauce: Morley's Chicken and Heinz. A spot on example of what smart trademark licensing and collaboration can achieve. Two icons - cult-status South London fried chicken chain and the condiment king - and generate instant buzz and value by combining their brand equity. This is how you leverage value beyond your core product (see earlier post re my unhealthy love of Marmite...). Morley's runs a tight brand control in addition to keen collabs - making the IP news this year with its dispute with Metro's. The case, which went all the way to the Court of Appeal, was a major win for Morley's. Some key 'takeaways':   • Infringement Found: The court found that Metro's logo and its "MMM" and "Triple M" burgers infringed on Morley's registered trade marks. The similarities in the red-and-white colour scheme, font, and layout were simply too close.   • Settlement Breaches: The case also hinged on the franchisee (Metro's) having breached a prior settlement agreement.   • The Sober Consumer: Interesting legal detail - the Court of Appeal’s ruling that the "average consumer" for fast food is not to be assessed by reference to those who are intoxicated. The notional consumer should remain reasonably well-informed and sober. Despite errors in the initial judge's assessment (by including intoxicated consumers), the finding of infringement was still upheld. If Morley's allowed its brand to lose value, the opportunity of collab may not be so attractive to other businesses. They've come out of this waaaay stronger. Trade marks in the food sector are big business; we have been fortunate to have supported Mowgli Street Food and others for many years in its IP needs, and its menu and item names are part of its brand DNA and value. Now I'm going down a fast food IP rabbit hole about the US chain 'Mr Charlie's' and how they haven't got in trouble with the golden arches... Of all the businesses to prod?! Tom Broster ASENDA LAW Mark Corran

It’s the perfect mark ... but it is a registered trade mark! 😢 You already know that protecting your brand name is crucial, and the one that you want to use is already a registered trade mark. So what should you do? We see many businesses give up on protecting a desired mark because a third party already has a registration for the same mark. It is not their fault. The think that a registered trade mark gives the owner absolute monopoly over the use of the mark. But the truth is that the monopoly only extends to the goods and services covered by the registration, unless the mark is deemed to be what is categorized as a “well known” mark. If the registration is in a different class to the one that you want to use the mark for, then it is possible to get registration for that “perfect mark” that you desire to use. You see, trade mark classes offer a solution that lets businesses in different industries use the same mark without conflict. The mark “POLO” is an example, which is registered for confectionary, cars and clothing by different entities.  The registrations coexist because they belong to different trademark classes, making it possible to share the name without legal issues. If you’re looking for a way to secure your brand while standing out in your industry, looking into the class(es) covered by the mark on the UK Trade Mark Register might reveal whether protection for the mark is possible or not. With the right strategy, you can make trade mark laws work in your favour and protect your brand in a crowded marketplace. 🌍 #SMEs #IPProtectiont #TradeMarks #Entrepreneurship #FranksandCo #TrademarkStrategy #BrandProtection 

Protecting your brand and intellectual property is an important part of building your business and identifying the value of your assets.💡✅ A trade mark™️®️ is a powerful asset and a type of intellectual property right which distinguishes your unique brand, product or service from other competitors in the market. A trade mark can be used to protect your business name, logo or aspects of your brand. Trade marks can be used to protect a logo, phrase, word, letter, colour, sound, smell, picture, movement, aspect of packaging or any combination of these. 🦘Well known Australian trade marks include Cadbury's royal purple, the Qantas kangaroo, Vegemite, the Arnott's rosella and the ABC logo, to name a few. While these are well known, large companies, a trade mark can prove equally as important for small businesses or startups as a way to protect your IP and ensure a competitor does not copy your brand or aim to 'piggyback' off your goodwill and reputation. When applying for a registered trade mark, it should be considered and cover the classes and sub-classes of goods and services that sufficiently describe and cover your business and brand to ensure you may obtain and maintain registration and protection over your trade marks. While registering a trade mark is not essential in Australia, it can provide stronger legal protection by asserting your exclusive ownership of the marks to third parties and reducing the likelihood of copycats. 📈 A small early investment can save you thousands of dollars in rebranding costs and enforcement actions if another person was to either copy your brand or you unknowingly infringe on someone else's brand and trade marks. We help clients in establishing a robust IP strategy, to ensure you can maintain your brand reputation and avoid infringing on another person's IP rights before selling in Australia or launching overseas. 📩 DM or email us at hello@boothelegal.com if you would like to discuss protecting your brand, trade marks, enforcing your rights or your IP strategy. #IP #trademarks #brandprotection #internationalbusiness #tech #law #business #infringement #intellectualproperty

In the case of Rituals International Trademarks B.V. v Zheni Aleksieva, the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) affirmed that the retail sale of proprietary brand products can indeed be regarded as legitimate utilization of a trademark that has been registered specifically for retail services. This ruling underscores the significance of genuine use in the context of trademark law, illustrating that the sale of one's own branded merchandise can fulfill the requirements for maintaining trademark rights, thereby reinforcing the importance of active engagement in the marketplace for brand owners.

Choosing the right kind of trade mark can shape how your brand, or your members’ brands, grow. In this article, Aletia Oberholster and Zaskia Botha, explain the key differences between ordinary trade marks (for individual brand owners) and collective trade marks (for associations or groups), including who owns them, how they’re used, and what protection each provides. Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/ddqxfFTT #IntellectualProperty #TradeMarks #CIPC #BrandProtection #SouthAfricanLaw

☠️ When bold branding meets legal boundaries Death Wish Coffee has filed a lawsuit claiming that Liquid Death’s potential move into the coffee market could cause consumer confusion due to overlapping brand product categories. Even when companies use similar names or themes, trademarks are defined not just by words or logos, but by the specific goods and services they cover. And brands grow and expand into new categories, these boundaries can start to blur. 👉 Read the full article to learn why similar trademarks can coexist in some markets but clash in others: https://lnkd.in/d-a-vDMm

The Modern Goli Soda Bottle’s Legal and Cultural Journey. There’s something magical about the pop of a Goli Soda bottle. For generations, this marble-sealed glass bottle has been a symbol of childhood summers, bustling street corners, and fizzy refreshment that cost just a few rupees. But today, the Goli Soda bottle has moved far beyond nostalgia—it’s at the center of a modern legal and business story about innovation, branding, and intellectual property. A Century-Old Classic The Codd-neck bottle, patented in the late 19th century, was introduced to India during colonial times. Its defining feature—a marble that sealed the bottle under pressure—made it both functional and charmingly unique. By the mid-20th century, Goli Soda had become a staple across towns and villages. It was inexpensive, accessible, and instantly recognizable. Sunrise’s Modern Twist By the 2000s, global soft drink brands overshadowed the beloved beverage. Enter M/s Sunrise Import and Export, a Hyderabad-based company led by Managing Partner Mohammed Abdul Khadar. Sunrise didn’t just aim to sell soda under their brand “Spark” but wanted to reinvent the Goli Soda experience. The company launched its Spark brand with modernized Codd-neck bottles, sleek caps, and opener. The Bottle,Cap,Openerdesigns were patented and hold validity. These updates maintained the nostalgic charm but added usability, visual appeal, and compatibility with modern retail and distribution channels. It’s not just a container—it’s an experience, a legacy, and a livelihood for micro-entrepreneurs across India.” When Innovation Meets Imitation Success brought imitation. Sunrise discovered that AGI Greenpac Ltd, one of India’s largest glass manufacturers, along with VV Enterprises a bottler under brand name “POP AND GULP” with Bhola Enterprises as Distributor were allegedly producing lookalike bottles and selling them in the market. Sunrise argued that this infringed on its patents, risking market confusion and damage to its brand reputation. The company submitted patent certificates, embossed design drawings, sample bottles, and invoices to the Special Court for Commercial Disputes, Ranga Reddy District. The court noted that a prima facie case had been established and granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction, restraining the defendants from manufacturing or selling the infringing bottles until October 17, 2025.