
My Answer is a Ye.
This lawsuit is similar to a recent dispute that arose between GreeNYC and Apple. GreeNYC has an "infinity apple" design and is colored green to create environmental awareness. GreeNYC applied for its mark in May, 2007 and Apple filed an opposition.
Though both use a single leafed apple, the leaf is each is turned the other way. Filing an opposition is important when a mark is up for registration and that is exactly what Apple did - be prudent. However, given the dissimilarities in design and goods/services area, it might well be settled amicably or grounds for refusal under Section 2 of the Lanham Act will be considered. (See NYT)
On the other hand, technology related services using an apple for a logo, with a leaf pointing in the same direction....the question is - will "it" be saved by the bite (or the lack thereof)?
Trademark infringement is ascertained when there is a likelihood that consumer confusion can result. The factors considered are - strength of the mark, degree of similarity of the marks, degree of similarity of the goods, likelihood that plaintiff will bridge the gap, evidence of actual confusion, defendant’s good faith in adopting mark, quality of defendant’s products/services, and sophistication of buyers. With famous marks however, there is the added issue of dilution to distinctiveness.
Apple is a global brand with an undeniably distinctive trademark - the apple with a bite on the right side and a leaf titled to the right. Apple also uses various colors within its mark. The Canadian School's logo has:
- a whole apple without THE bite
- a leaf pointed in the same direction as the Apple mark
- the acronym VSBT
- multi-colored with blue and white
- a "stylized mountain"
Another problem for the school is that it offers computer related courses and that brings the proximity of goods closer than GreeNYC's environmental endeavors.
No comments:
Post a Comment