Abstract
Brand names constitute a form of value for commercial products, because they suppose a savings of search costs for the consumer. The law, as a consequence, has the obligation to protect brand names. But the number of attractive brand names is not infinite and sometimes companies seek brand names which are reminiscent of others. In this article a conflict between two companies for the distinctiveness of two brand names is addressed: one Spanish company used the English common noun doughnut for a product similar to the American pastry, while the other company had already registered donut as a brand name, in addition to its variants. This second company sued the first on the grounds that the names were not distinctive. Here we offer the arguments presented to the judge in defense of the distinctiveness of doughnut and the judgment.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
