WIPR survey: English High Court wrong on Kit Kat ruling, lawyers say
The English High Court’s decision to reject Nestlé’s attempt to trademark the shape of the four-fingered Kit Kat chocolate bar was wrong, readers have told WIPR.
In WIPR’s most popular survey to date, 70% of respondents said they disagreed with the ruling, handed down by Mr Justice Arnold earlier this month.
In his January 20 decision, Arnold said the proposed trademark had not acquired distinctive character and that consumers would not necessarily recognise the shape as a trademark if the Kit Kat brand name was absent from the product.
Nestlé’s attempt to trademark the shape in 2010 was opposed by rival chocolate maker Cadbury in a dispute which made it all the way up to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Despite the survey results, readers’ comments indicated that there was still plenty of disagreement surrounding the decision.
One said that if the shape of the Kit Kat has not acquired enough distinctiveness to be protected as a trademark then “we may as well abandon the concept of acquired distinctiveness”.
But another said that “no consumers” rely on the shape to recognise the product as Nestlé’s.
“The product is sold in foil packaging that doesn’t even allow you to see the shape of the product. The shape simply does not function as a trademark in any way,” the readers said, adding that allowing the trademark would give Nestlé an “undeserved and unfair monopoly”.
Following the ruling, lawyers told WIPR that the dispute would probably continue given that Nestlé is planning to appeal against the decision and that there were uncertainties in Arnold’s ruling.
But one respondent seemed to think that the outcome should have been more straightforward.
“Open the pack, see the chocolate bar, you know it’s a Kit Kat. That’s a (registrable) trademark. Only people who spend too much of their lives in trademarks would think otherwise,” the reader said.
Another reader asked what a purchaser would think if it unwrapped a plain, unmarked “identically shaped and sized four-wafer” bar.
“I suspect most would think it was a ‘knock-off’ of the well-known Kit Kat bar, and thus that it was not connected with the makers of that brand.”
For this week’s survey we ask: “Last week, we reported that the US government was considering making it harder to obtain high damages in copyright cases. Do you think it is too easy to obtain substantial damages in copyright cases?”
Already registered?
Login to your account
If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.
For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk