Starbucks trademark opposition rejected in Singapore
The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) has rejected an opposition from Starbucks to a trademark application from a Japanese manufacturer of dairy products.
Morinaga Nyugyo Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Morinaga Milk Industry) applied in 2013 to register a trademark in classes 29 and 30 relating to coffee and milk products.
The trademark included a black circular logo with ‘McRainier’ written inside at the top and ‘Espresso & Milk’ underneath. In between the two phrases was a white-lined circle with mountain tops in the centre.
The application was published in March 2015 for opposition.
A year later, Starbucks claimed that this was too similar to its logo which features a green outer circle incorporating the words ‘Starbucks’ and ‘Coffee’ and an inner circle featuring a mermaid.
However, on November 22, IP adjudicator Lorraine Tay found that the two parties’ respective marks were dissimilar.
She rejected Starbucks’ arguments that the green-black-white colour scheme and the layout of the marks within a concentric circle device rendered the marks similar.
“The colour scheme or concentric circles were not in themselves distinctive identifiers of the opponent’s goods as well. The distinctiveness of the opponent’s marks resided in the depiction of the marks as a whole, in which the textual element (ie, ‘Starbucks’) and/or the mermaid icon played a huge role.”
She added: “The absence of mark-similarity means that one of the critical elements necessary for a confusing connection to be established is lacking; and if there is no confusing connection, there cannot logically be a likelihood of damage.”
The decision comes after Starbucks filed a with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board earlier this month.
Starbucks’ mark, an outline of its white cup with a green circle in the middle, was applied for in July 2015. The mark covers class 30 (coffee, tea and hot chocolate) and class 43 (coffee bar and tea house).
However, it was refused registration in class 30 because the mark differed in the drawing and specimen, and was rejected in class 43 because the specimen was illegible.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.
Today’s top stories:
INTA agrees five Brexit principles, including minimum costs
Coca-Cola accused of bullying UK coffee shop owners
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