Ferrari loses horse logo suit to local drink brand

New Straits Times

9 hours ago

KUALA LUMPUR: Italian supercar icon Ferrari SpA (Ferrari), renowned for its prancing horse emblem, has lost a trademark courtroom battle to a local energy drink company over a pair of rearing horses.
The High Court dismissed Ferrari's legal action against Sunrise-Mark Sdn Bhd, ruling that the latter's "Wee Power" logo was not confusingly similar to Ferrari's world-famous mark and could proceed to registration.
Judge Adlin Abdul Majid made it clear that Ferrari's claims of potential confusion did not hold water.
Ferrari as plaintiff filed the originating summons against Sunrise-Mark to set aside the decision of the Registrar of Trademarks, of dismissing its opposition and allowing the latter's trademark application last year.
Ferrari had argued that Sunrise-Mark's trademark, which features two rearing horses facing each other with a bold letter W between them and the words "Wee Power" below, infringed on its exclusive rights to the iconic single rearing horse used on its cars, merchandise, and global branding.
Ferrari also tried to play down the words "Wee Power" by arguing that the term "Power" was disclaimed in the trademark registration, and that the word "Wee" was too generic to be considered unique.
However, the court in its decision dated May 30 disagreed with the plaintiff on grounds that the only similarity between the marks is the horses.
"The plaintiff's mark is a device mark with one rearing horse while the defendant's (Sunrise-Mark) mark contains two rearing horses facing each other.
"The defendant's mark does not focus only on the rearing horses as it contains a large letter "W" between the heads of the two horses and the words "Wee Power" below the horses.
"I accept the defendant's explanation that the word "Wee" is derived from the name of the defendant's founder, Wee Juan Chien, and does not refer to the ordinary definition of the word "wee" in the English language.
"I find it unlikely that the defendant had intended for its energy drinks to be branded with words that mean 'very small power' or 'very early power'," she said.
Adlin said the court found no reasonable likelihood that someone shopping for an energy drink would confuse it with Ferrari's luxury vehicles.
"The plaintiff and the defendant are involved in different industries, with the plaintiff in the luxury automotive industry while the defendant traded in consumable goods.
"Both types of products do not compete with each other, and the plaintiff's customers and the defendant's customers are unlikely to overlap.
"I find it unlikely that the average consumer would see the defendant's mark and form the impression that it is similar to the plaintiff's mark," she added.
The court also ordered the carmaker to pay costs.