Tottenham Hotspur have forced non-league football club Fleet Spurs to change the design of their badge after Tottenham threatened Fleet with trade mark infringement proceedings because the badge is
Tottenham Hotspur have forced non-league football club Fleet Spurs to change the design of their badge after Tottenham threatened Fleet with trade mark infringement proceedings because the badge is too similar to theirs.
Fleet Spurs were formed in 1948 in homage to Tottenham Hotspur. Fleet recently held a competition for a fan to design the new club badge with the winning entry incorporated a cockerel almost identical to that in the Tottenham badge.
Consequently, Tottenham requested that Fleet cease to use the badge on the basis that a lack of action may undermine their ability to stop other unauthorised people such as counterfeiters from using the club's logo for commercial purposes. Fleet has removed the logo from its website and will now have to take down any signs from around the stadium. They will, however, be allowed to use their current kit until the end of the season.
Whilst the Fleets Spurs badge would appear a prima facie infringement, case law may support the assertion that it is not. In the Lotus case, the High Court found that two separate Formula 1 teams with Lotus in their names each side owned separate goodwill in the Lotus name and there was no realistic likelihood of confusion because although both team names contained the word Lotus, it was common practice for different teams to use the same brand name in this way. In particular, commentators and spectators had no difficultly in differentiating between the two teams.
However, given that Fleet Spurs have used an almost identical cockerel, which is the dominant and highly distinctive element of both marks, a claim for trade mark infringement by Tottenham would likely succeed.
If you would like to read our more in depth analysis of this matter, please click here.
Fleet Spurs were formed in 1948 in homage to Tottenham Hotspur. Fleet recently held a competition for a fan to design the new club badge with the winning entry incorporated a cockerel almost identical to that in the Tottenham badge.
Consequently, Tottenham requested that Fleet cease to use the badge on the basis that a lack of action may undermine their ability to stop other unauthorised people such as counterfeiters from using the club's logo for commercial purposes. Fleet has removed the logo from its website and will now have to take down any signs from around the stadium. They will, however, be allowed to use their current kit until the end of the season.
Whilst the Fleets Spurs badge would appear a prima facie infringement, case law may support the assertion that it is not. In the Lotus case, the High Court found that two separate Formula 1 teams with Lotus in their names each side owned separate goodwill in the Lotus name and there was no realistic likelihood of confusion because although both team names contained the word Lotus, it was common practice for different teams to use the same brand name in this way. In particular, commentators and spectators had no difficultly in differentiating between the two teams.
However, given that Fleet Spurs have used an almost identical cockerel, which is the dominant and highly distinctive element of both marks, a claim for trade mark infringement by Tottenham would likely succeed.
If you would like to read our more in depth analysis of this matter, please click here.