Is Kit Kat’s trade mark saga set to take a break?

Is Kit Kat’s trade mark saga set to take a break?

For over a decade Nestlé has attempted to protect Kit Kat’s three dimensional shape, with rival Mondelez fighting hard to prevent its success.

Last Wednesday marked the latest chapter in the lengthy legal battle, as the European Court of Justice dismissed the confectionary giant’s most recent appeal to safeguard the shape of its famed bar.

 

In the ruling the court said that Nestle had failed to demonstrate that the bar’s shape was of distinctive enough character in all the countries it was attempting to obtain a trademark in.

 

This latest blow comes 12 years after Nestle originally secured a trademark for its four-finger bar in 2006 from the EUIPO. This prompted Cadbury owner Mondelez, which produces the similarly shaped Leo Bar and Norwegian Kvikk Lunsj, to appeal against the decision.

 

The case returned to court in 2016 with a lower EU court annulling the original ruling, and challenging Nestle to demonstrate that Kit Kat’s shape was “distinctive enough through use” in every EU country it sought protection in.

 

In the latest ruling it was disclosed that Nestle had proved the bar’s distinctiveness in 10 nations, but failed in Belgium, Ireland, Greece, and Portugal. As a result, Nestle’s trademark protecting the shape of its Kit Kat could now be in jeopardy.

 

The ruling could be significantly detrimental to the confectionary company, as own-brand imitations could soon start appearing on supermarket shelves, looking to capitalize on Kit Kat’s success.

 

Nestle’s latest legal battle has once again ignited discussion throughout the intellectual property community about what criteria is required to gain EU-wide protection for shapes.

 

Rosie Le Breton, trainee trademark attorney at Wynne Jones IP, said the case highlights “challenges faced by companies whose product success is intrinsically tied into their ability to be distinctive”.

 

She said: “This is the latest ruling in what has been an increasingly complex and legally significant case for both Nestle and Mondelez.

 

“Patent attorneys and those across the IP industry have been watching the unfolding drama keenly for the past 12 years, as the result could set a vital legal precedent for how registered shape marks are considered in future cases.

 

“Alongside the IP industry, the dismissal will also no doubt have a ripple effect across the business world, from retail to fashion and beyond. Companies could now be set to reassess realistically just how distinctive their own brand shapes are and if they could withstand a legal challenge.

 

“Furthermore, the ruling could have an even wider impact on the design of new products, with brands intentionally creating uniquely distinctive shapes in a bid to avoid a Nestle vs Mondelez style battle.”

Related News

US Inventor Declarations and Assignments
news

US Inventor Declarations and Assignments

After a patent application has been filed, the inventor may be required to sign and submit various forms.  What happens if this is several years into the patent process, and the inventor can no longer be reached to sign these forms?  And what can you do now to prevent any complications from arising?

UKIPO ending temporary fee changes on 31 March 2021
news

UKIPO ending temporary fee changes on 31 March 2021

The UK Intellectual Property Office (UK IPO) temporarily reduced or removed certain official fees associated with patents, trade marks and registered designs because of the disruption caused by the Coronavirus pandemic. However, the temporary fee changes are set to end on 31 March 2021.

Insurance for IP Litigation Costs
news

Insurance for IP Litigation Costs

If you own any intellectual property (IP) rights, are you concerned about your exposure to litigation, and how you will finance any legal action?  One way to address this concern is by means of an insurance policy.

Does owning IP rights improve economic performance?
news

Does owning IP rights improve economic performance?

A recent study performed by the European Patent Office (EPO) and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) has shown that companies which own at least one patent, trade mark or registered design generate on average 20% higher revenues per employee and pay their staff on average 19% higher wages compared to companies that do not own any of these intellectual property (IP) rights.

Let it go!
news

Let it go!

Keeping an IP budget afloat despite sunk costs.

The cost of securing IP can be heavily front loaded. Examples of such costs include patent drafting, pre-filing searches, filing fees, etc. These costs become “sunk” costs in that they cannot be recovered. Because IP protection can be a relatively long process, at any time during the process there are likely to be significant “prospective” costs: future costs that may be wholly or partially avoided depending on actions taken.

Turkish Declarations of Use
news

Turkish Declarations of Use

Have you recently validated your European patent in Turkey?  Did you know that in addition to paying annual renewal fees, Turkish law also requires you to submit a public declaration stating whether you have actively worked your invention in Turkey?

Managing your business-critical IP during the COVID-19 crisis
news

Managing your business-critical IP during the COVID-19 crisis

UK businesses are fighting for survival during the continuing COVID-19 outbreak and trying to trade under difficult conditions, the likes of which haven’t been seen in the living memory of most business people. If you’re afraid that your business is going to the wall, it probably isn’t the top of your mind to pay for a patent application for your new technology or a registration of the trade mark for your brand new clothing range, right?  Where is the money coming from to invest in such luxuries as IP, we hear you say, when staff are being furloughed and orders have been postponed?

Videoconferencing: the future of oral proceedings at the EPO?
news

Videoconferencing: the future of oral proceedings at the EPO?

The European Patent Office has announced that videoconferencing will become the norm for oral proceedings before examination and opposition divisions until at least 15 September 2021. But is this a taste of what the future holds for oral proceedings at the EPO?

aipex logo aipex logo aipex logo