Formula One Licensing does not have the exclusive rights to the use of F1
The time is certainly ripe for settling scores in court. This time, it's about the use of the term F1, which was put under deliberation by the European Court of Justice. It stated, on appeal, that Formula One Licensing could not oppose the registration of a trademark containing the term F1.
The legal battle was launched in 2005 by FOL, the commercial subsidiary of Formula One Group, to oppose Racing Live’s registration of the trademark «F1-Live» within the European community. F1 Live was a news site about Formula 1, which has since transitioned to the global brand ESPN F1.
In the first instance, the European justice system had sided with Bernie Ecclestone’s empire, on the grounds that there was a strong resemblance between the two brands. It is precisely this decision that was overturned today by the European Court of Justice. The court stated: Conceptually, it should be noted that the earlier trademark refers to a particular type of racing car, namely Formula 1 cars, and can also be perceived as implicitly referring to Formula 1 races. The requested mark conveys the same message, but the addition of the word “live,” which evokes the live commentary or broadcast of an event, makes it conceptually richer than the earlier trademark. Therefore, while the common verbal element “f1” implies that the conflicting signs have some conceptual similarities, the degree of this similarity remains low.
Moreover, the Court established that the logo filed by FOL was sufficiently different from that of the news site (italic writing versus vertical) so that there could be no confusion in the public’s mind: « In the present case, within the framework of a global assessment of the risk of confusion, characterized by the absence of visual similarity and the fact that the similarity on the phonetic and conceptual levels is only limited, it is sufficient to note that the Board of Appeal was correct in holding that there was no risk of confusion between the contested signs, as the relevant public will not confuse the requested mark with that of the applicant. In this regard, it should be noted that the generic meaning attributed by the public to the F 1 sign ensures that this public will understand that the requested mark concerns Formula 1, but, due to the completely different arrangement, will not establish a link with the applicant’s activities. »
This is therefore good news for all information sites and newspapers that use “F1” in their domain name, as they cannot be attacked by FOL on this matter.
With the participation of RacingBusiness.fr
