Publications
European IP Bulletin, Issue 19, February - Patents
Patents
6. German Court Shaves Off Gillette for Energizer
Energizer has scored a recent victory in its bitter fight against Gillette relating to its shaving blade patent in Germany.
When Energizer bought the Schick-Wilkinson Sword shaving business
and, in 2003, marketed “Quattro” (a four blade shaving razor) in the
US and Europe, it met a fierce resistance and opposition from
Gillette. Gillette maintained that the razor infringed its patented
“progressive blade geometry” technology used in the Mach3 blades.
Gillette launched various lawsuits against Energizer in an attempt
to protect its intellectual property. The lawsuits across Europe and
US asked for unspecified damages and for a court order to prohibit
Energizer from launching its product in the market.
In January 2004, a court of Massachusetts had ruled that there was
no reasonable likelihood that Gillette would succeed on one of its
key claims and hence refused to halt sales of Quattro. The present
German ruling which found that Quattro does not infringe the
Gillette patent comes as the second victory for Energizer within a
year.
The German ruling is a vindication for Energizer, who has
steadfastly maintained that its product is unlike any other razor,
including that of Gillette. However, it is clear from the statements
of company representatives and the lawsuits still pending in US that
the conflict is far from over.
7. Google Trade Mark Battles
The Nanterre court in France has ruled that Google must not
use the trade marks of Le Meridien Hotels and Resort to trigger
keyword advertisements. The court found that Google infringed Le
Meridien’s trade mark by allowing the hotel chain’s rivals to bid on
the keywords of its name which, in turn, causes the competitor’s
name to figure prominently in related search results. This is not
the first time that Google has lost in France. They also were
successfully sued by Louis Vuitton.
This decision strikes a blow to Google’s financial prospects in
Europe. Almost all of Google’s revenue is earned from keyword
advertising linked to search technology. This technique is so
effective because the Web is one of the primary ways people search
for products and services.
A similar case brought by Geico Insurance Company in the US was
unsuccessful. The Judge ruled that that as a matter of law it is not
trade mark infringement to use trade marks as keywords to trigger
advertising.
Google believes that this case indicates a change in the legal
landscape and is thus changing its trade mark policy. Google is
replying on the long-held tenet of trade mark law that provides that
there can be no infringement of a registered mark unless there is a
likelihood of consumer confusion. According to the company, internet
users are not likely to be confused by the clearly labelled text ads
that appear on Google.
This change to Google’s trade mark policy underscores the ongoing
legal uncertainties raised by keyword advertising programs offered
by search engines. The move also signals Google's increasingly
aggressive stance in defending its primary source of revenue. Some
see this almost a declaration of war on trade mark owners, or at the
very least, an invitation to more lawsuits.
Click here to return to the Summary page, or on any of the headings below to see the full case notes for that topic:
