Minibar has a conflict with The Minibar. According to Minibar The Minibar infringes its trade name law. Under the Trade Name Act it is prohibited to run a business under a name that resembles an older trade name if the public is likely to be confused as a result. Minibar was first.
Tricky aspect: Minibar is located in the heart of Amsterdam, The Minibar is located far beyond the canals (in Eindhoven). Trade name law has traditionally attached great importance to the place where the two companies are located. This is stated explicitly in the Trade Name Act: “likelihood of confusion regarding the nature of the business and the place where they are located." The ratio: to confuse two companies you at least have to know both companies.
The court in Den Bosch had to decide whether there was a likelihood of confusion between Minibar and The Minibar. Minibar presented a modern argument. According to Minibar, although the bars are located in different cities, there can still exist confusion among the public seeing that both bars are active on the Internet and social media like Facebook, MySpace and Twitter.
The court did not follow Minibar in its judgment. The ground in which the court explains why, is worthy of an integral quote (freely translated):
BDRM has emphasized the importance of social media. According to currently - certainly below the Great Rivers but from my own knowledge also elsewhere - prevailing opinion, for both customer and operator the interesting contact with a bar or pub arises par excellence because the customer physically enters the bar, followed by ordering mostly alcoholic drinks. The social aspect particularly arises from the physical presence of other persons in the establishment. To put it short: services of a cafe-bar are local and not virtual. A computer monitor does not serve beer.
PSV – Ajax 1-0, but I think that we have not heard the last of this case…
Daniël Haije
|
office Emerald House Jozef Israëlskade 48-G Amsterdam, the Netherlands t +31 (0)20 - 305 3066 www.hoogenhaak.nl |
post PO Box 76780 1070 KB Amsterdam e info@hoogenhaak.nl f +31 (0)20 - 305 3069 chamber of commerce 34314579 |
Minibar has a conflict with The Minibar. According to Minibar The Minibar infringes its trade name law. Under the Trade Name Act it is prohibited to run a business under a name that resembles an older trade name if the public is likely to be confused as a result. Minibar was first.
Tricky aspect: Minibar is located in the heart of Amsterdam, The Minibar is located far beyond the canals (in Eindhoven). Trade name law has traditionally attached great importance to the place where the two companies are located. This is stated explicitly in the Trade Name Act: “likelihood of confusion regarding the nature of the business and the place where they are located." The ratio: to confuse two companies you at least have to know both companies.
The court in Den Bosch had to decide whether there was a likelihood of confusion between Minibar and The Minibar. Minibar presented a modern argument. According to Minibar, although the bars are located in different cities, there can still exist confusion among the public seeing that both bars are active on the Internet and social media like Facebook, MySpace and Twitter.
The court did not follow Minibar in its judgment. The ground in which the court explains why, is worthy of an integral quote (freely translated):
BDRM has emphasized the importance of social media. According to currently - certainly below the Great Rivers but from my own knowledge also elsewhere - prevailing opinion, for both customer and operator the interesting contact with a bar or pub arises par excellence because the customer physically enters the bar, followed by ordering mostly alcoholic drinks. The social aspect particularly arises from the physical presence of other persons in the establishment. To put it short: services of a cafe-bar are local and not virtual. A computer monitor does not serve beer.
PSV – Ajax 1-0, but I think that we have not heard the last of this case…
Daniël Haije