|It says TEQUILA MATADOR,|
says Merpel, but isn't it a picture
of a Red Bull ...?
- the likelihood of confusion was to be examined first by comparing the TEQUILA MATADOR HECHO EN MEXICO logo with the earlier German MATADOR trade mark;
- the relevant public was composed of average consumers in Germany [this says a lot about the popularity of tequila in Germany, Merpel thinks];
- in accordance with the case-law of the General Court (MEZZOPANE and MONTEBELLO RHUM AGRICOLE), the alcoholic beverages covered by the TEQUILA MATADOR HECHO EN MEXICO logo were different to both the ‘beers’ and the ‘mineral and aerated waters and other non-alcoholic drinks; fruit drinks and fruit juices; syrups and other preparations for making beverages’ covered by the earlier German MATADOR trade mark, due to their nature, origin, ingredients, method of production, intended purpose, use, lack of substitutability and lack of complementarity, even if some of those goods were, to a certain extent, in competition with each other;
- the finding that there was no similarity between the goods at issue was also valid in all the Member States other than Germany in which the earlier international MATADOR trade marks were protected;
- there was no identity or similarity of the goods covered by the signs at issue, so that, even if those signs were found to be identical, there would be no likelihood of confusion.
|Does tequila really not quench thirst?|
The IPKat vows to find out ...