Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> IPKat

Intellectual Property Law

: IPKat

The subtle art of comparison: your chance to vote

By Johanna Gibson, David Pearce, Jeremy Phillips and Ilanah Simon.

Don't read the ruling in which a comparison of the two signs displayed here was undertaken (the IPKat isn't even giving its jurisdiction or citation yet). Just bear in mind the fact that they are intended for use on identical goods (let's say wines).

Take a look at these marks and bear in mind that

"... the risk that the public might believe that the goods or services in question come from the same undertaking or from economically-linked undertakings constitutes a likelihood of confusion. In accordance with that case-law, the likelihood of confusion must be assessed globally, according to the relevant public?s perception of marks and of the goods or services in question, taking into account all factors relevant to the circumstances of the case, particularly the interdependence between the similarity of the trade marks and that of the goods or services covered ".

The 'public', for these purposes, consists of average consumers.

Do you consider, on the basis of the above, that there is a likelihood of confusion between the two marks? Please give your answer by clicking the "yes" or "no" button in the poll that appears at the top of the IPKat's side bar.

Full post as published by IPKat on November 23, 2010 (boomark / email).