- Swatch takes bite out of Apple’s bad faith parody allegation (Swatch AG v Apple Inc)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
IP analysis: In upholding the appeal by Swatch against the hearing officer’s decision, Iain Purves QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge), prevented the extension of bad faith cases to those including parody. In doing so, he has highlighted Apple’s failure to protect properly Steve Job’s catch phrase ‘One more thing’ used at the end of presentations. The case also considers the contortions that legal teams sometimes have to attempt, where the original pleaded case in the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) does not actually cover what might have been the best way to argue Swatch’s application was in bad faith. In this instance, the more straightforward ‘blocking’ registration argument, well-known from the Lindt v Hauswirth decision in the Court of Justice, seems more likely to have worked. However, Apple’s Notices of Opposition did not give this as a ground. Written by Paul A Harris, senior partner (IP Litigation) at Venner Shipley LLP.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial