LV sued City Chain for trademark infringement of its Flower Quatrefoil and Flower Quatrefoil Diamond. Quatrefoil means "a representation of a flower with four petals or a leaf with four leaflets, especially in heraldry." In other words, a representation that we distinctly recognize as being associated with LV. 
LV uses this pattern on many of its products. It claims that the quatrefoil pattern is distinctive to LV and City Chain's usage of the same pattern will confuse consumers. The existence of a similar product in the market lessens consumer appeal for a LV watch with the LV pattern. As a result, no distinctiveness remains. A claim for trademark infringement looks at factors such as strength of mark, degree of similarity, proximity of products or services, quality of defendant’s products or services, sophistication of the buyer, etc.
City Chain defended itself by stating that there is no similarity in the quatrefoil designs and that the consumer bases for LV and City Chain are dissimilar. Claiming use of the quatrefoil as a decorative mark, it emphasied non-resemblance to the LV trademark. Additionally, to bolster its defence against consumer confusion, City Chain points to the presence of the word "Solvil" on the watch.
Having the word "Solvil" on the watch, albiet as Mr. Wong (from LV) says is in a small typeface, is a factor that will be considered as evidence of dissipating consumer confusion. Another significant factor considered will be the difference in the consuming public for the two products. Now to see what evidence is presented in support of or against existent or potential consumer confusion.
No comments:
Post a Comment