After 10 years of pondering the power of natural remedies, the Supreme Court in Holland has decided it is time for change.
Dr Edward Bach was a doctor and bacteriologist who died in 1936. He devoted the last part of his life to developing natural remedies that would keep patients emotionally, as well as physically, healthy. He believed anyone should be able to follow his methods, and through this idealism and his books many followers discovered the healing balance he propagated. Until 1991, that is.
In that year, there was a hitch in the flow of knowledge, when Bach Flower Remedies Limited (BFR) decided to monopolise Bach’s methods by registering the reference to the good doctor as a trademark. From 1998, Healing Herbs Limited (HH) challenged these registrations after being ordered to refrain from the use of references ‘Bach’, ‘rescue’ and ‘remedy(ie)’ by the Dutch court in 1991.
Both companies market Benelux products, developed using Dr Bach’s methods. Since BFR uses the reference ‘Bach’ on its marketed products, mostly in the shape of an ‘autograph’, the company is convinced consumers consider this mark an indication of the origin of its products.
To continue reading, you need a subscription to WIPR. Start a subscription to WIPR for £455.
In-house feature articles, the archive and expert comment require a paid subscription. Subscribe now.
Want to give it a try? We are offering a two week free trial to the WIPR website – register and select “Free Trial” to begin access to the full WIPR archive and read the latest news, features and expert comment. Begin your free trial here.
Is your 2 week free trial about to end? Upgrade to a 12 month subscription for £455 now.
If you have already subscribed please login.
If you have any technical issues please email tech support.