Region: Denmark

Use of GALLERI LEGO did not infringe the LEGO trademark

In <i>LEGO Holding A/S vs. Louise Lego (previously Louise Lego Andersen)</i>, the Supreme Court found that the use of LEGO by Louise Lego was not disloyal, improper or detrimental to the LEGO trademark, and Louise Lego was therefore entitled to use the name Galleri Lego, the domain name and use LEGO as a meta-tag and key word on the internet.

01 January 2008

Linking to and use of “supplier” in relation to Diesel constitutes a violation of good ma

In <i>Diesel Denmark ApS vs. Fabric Denmark ApS</i>, the Maritime and Commercial Court found that the use of the term “suppliers” in connection with DIESEL and the linking to was misleading and providing the false impression that the Fabric shops were authorized DIESEL dealers. Consequently, the use of DIESEL and linking to was considered a violation of good marketing practice, and Fabric was ordered to pay compensation and damages with DKK 25,000 (approx. EUR 3,300).

01 January 2008

Fisherman vodka found to infringe rights in the Fisherman’s Friend lozenge

The Supreme Court has held that the marketing of Fisherman vodka could be detrimental to Fisherman Friend’s lozenge, which was often marketed in connection with sports. Nortlander was ordered to cease use of the trademark Fisherman for vodka, to cease use of a number of bottle labels and to pay compensation and damages.

01 January 2008

Sport shoes not found to infringe Puma’s form strip trademark

In <i>Puma AG Rudolf Dassler Sport vs. Coop Danmark A/S</i>, the Supreme Court stated that Puma’s shoe has a low degree of distinctiveness and therefore only enjoyed protection against slavish imitations under the Danish Marketing Act. The Court found that the defendant’s shoe differed sufficiently from the plaintiff’s shoe and consequently the sale of the JFY Retro shoe did neither constitute trademark infringement nor a violation of good marketing practices.

01 January 2008

Use of Chanel trademarks on urn constitutes trademark infringement

In <i>Chanel S.A. vs. Begravelsesservice ApS</i>, the Maritime and Commercial Court found that a funeral service firm had made commercial use of the Chanel’s trademarks, and that such use had been detrimental to Chanel’s reputation. The funeral service firm was ordered to cease use of the Chanel trademarks and to pay compensation with DKK 25,000 (approx. EUR 3,300).

01 January 2008

Unlock unlimited access to all IAM content