-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Chitchat Why these two logos never langgar ?
- Thread starter Bonut
- Start date
same reason as this lo.
Last edited:
How did Hermes let Coach off like that ?
Answer : Distinctiveness. Would a moron in a hurry be confused? If not, it's ok.
And high and mighty SIA diam diam never pursue this Thailand bus company ?
Answer : Class registration.
same reason as this lo.
Answer : Class registration
Local Crocodile and French Lacoste got langgar and local won!
Also why mulberry and Burberry also never langgar?
Also why mulberry and Burberry also never langgar?
How did Hermes let Coach off like that ?
They are both customer focused companies? The respective owners know each other / are related? The brands are distinctive enough and discerning consumers are not fooled?
Just thinking: but most importantly, if the brand is focused on customer satisfaction and customers are not confused, then sue will only profit the lawyers and will not change status quo.
Also, assuming Hermes existed before COACH, then if not sure like after WW2 (end 1945), what is there to sue now like > half century too late. Average man would also be sophisticated enough to distinguish based on the Roman characters: so each trademark is sufficiently unique.
Last edited:
you must be a IP lawyer like me? :p
One is horse pulling carriage. The other is carriage pulling the horae. Difference is night and day
http://www.duetsblog.com/2014/01/articles/trademarks/horse-drawn-trademark-collision/
It is notable that Coach does not own and it doesn’t appear Coach or any predecessors ever tried to federally-register the non-verbal element of its horse-drawn carriage logo, do you suppose the principles set forth in Section 1207.01(c) of the TMEP explain why?
“When the marks at issue are both design marks, the similarity of the marks must be decided primarily on the basis of visual similarity. E.g., In re Vienna Sausage Mfg. Co., 16 USPQ2d 2044, 2047 (TTAB 1990). In this situation, consideration must be given to the fact that the marks usually will not be viewed side-by-side in the marketplace and a purchaser’s recollection of design marks is often of a general, rather than specific, nature; thus the marks may be confusingly similar despite differences between them. See, e.g., In re United Serv. Distribs., Inc., 229 USPQ 237 (TTAB 1986) (holding mark consisting of a design featuring silhouettes of a man and woman, used in connection with distributorship services in the field of health and beauty aids, and mark consisting of a design featuring silhouettes of a man and woman, used in connection with skin cream, likely to cause confusion).”
How did Hermes let Coach off like that ?
one is left hand drive, one is right hand drive….
prefer the hermes logo as the rider is kindly leading the horse to the water - if don't drink oso nebermind
exactly, if the taiwanese granny brings it to the mkt and packs the fish insai, it's customer satisfaction to the max
prefer the hermes logo as the rider is kindly leading the horse to the water - if don't drink oso nebermind
...
I see an automated robot on wheels dragging the reluctant horse into the slaughter house. The man behind is slightly amused to see the animal protesting in vain
Similar threads
