Fieldfisher and Mishcon Lead On Sky's Milestone Trademark Battle
The latest court hearing ruled that Sky had made trademarks in 'bad faith, but Skykick did still infringe on certain marks.
May 01, 2020 at 09:30 AM
2 minute read
Fieldfisher and Mishcon de Reya have guided respective clients Skykick and Sky through the latest court battle concerning a major trademark infringement case.
The latest ruling, delivered this week, saw both sides score victories. Judge Mr Justice Arnold ruled many of Sky's trade marks were invalid on 'bad faith' grounds, but found that SkyKick had infringed trade marks registered for 'electronic mail services'.
In January, following a referral from London's High Court, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that that trademarks cannot be ruled invalid simply because they lack clarity or precision.
The long-running dispute began when Sky brought proceedings against Skykick, a supplier of cloud computer systems, alleging infringement of trade marks.
SkyKick counterclaimed that Sky had registered trademarks on products that it had no intention of supplying, which constituted bad faith.
The Fieldfisher team representing Skykick was led by IP partner John Linneker, while Sky's legal counsel Mishcon de Reya was led by IP partner David Rose.
Lawyers within the IP community have hailed the judgment as significant in relation to how major brands manage their trademark portfolio, with some suggesting it will prompt large-scale reviews of current trademarks and further litigation.
Aaron Banks, partner at Keystone Law commented: "For existing brand owners, this puts their infringement and brand protection plans at risk, and it may mean that where a brand was proposed but ruled out because of an existing registration, which covered items that the owner clearly was not offering, there may be a way through.
"There are further consequences for trademark litigation and enforcement, and it seems likely that defendants will use the decision to cause chaos where there are allegations of infringement."
RPC partner Ben Mark also commented: "The decision may initially trouble brand owners. However, it will not affect a trade mark's ability to protect core goods and services or goods and services that brand owners believe they may use their marks for."
|Read more
Major Sky Trademark Ruling Clarifies Brand Owner Protections
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDentons Australian Chair Doug Stipanicev Back At Work After Investigation
4 minute readA&O Shearman Luminary, Former US Co-Chair, to Leave Partnership
Mayer Brown’s Hong Kong Split to Take Effect in the Coming Week
Trending Stories
- 1Tips For Creating Holiday Plans That Everyone Can Be Grateful For
- 2Red Tape, Talent Wars & Pricey Office Space Greet Firms Entering Saudi Arabia
- 3A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Becoming Clerk of the Forum
- 4Pa. Supreme Court Taps New Philadelphia Family Division Administrative Judge
- 55th Circuit Rules Open-Source Code Is Not Property in Tornado Cash Appeal
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250