High degree of similarity defeats weak distinctive elements
In 2014 Xiaomi Inc applied to register the EU trademark MI PAD for goods in Class 9 and services in Class 38. Apple Inc opposed the application on the grounds of a likelihood of confusion with its earlier IPAD mark in Classes 9 and 38. The EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) Opposition Division upheld the opposition and its decision was confirmed by the EUIPO First Board of Appeal. Following recourse action by Xiaomi, the case was brought before the EU General Court (Case T-893/16).
Want to read more?
Register to access two of our subscriber only articles per month
Subscribe for unlimited access to articles, in-depth analysis and research from the World Trademark Review experts
What our customers are saying
World Trademark Review, and particularly the WTR 1000, are always very useful sources for obtaining impressions and detailed information about foreign colleagues, law firms and jurisdictions. Our whole trademark team benefits from articles published in World Trademark Review.
Christian R Thomas
Attorney at law, legal and trademark department
KUHNEN & WACKER Intellectual Property Law Firm
Subscribe to World Trademark Review to receive access to the full range of trademark intelligence, insight, and case law, as well as our guides, rankings and daily market insight delivered to your inbox.
Register for more free content
- Read more World Trademark Review blogs and articles
- Receive the editor's weekly review by email