|” style =”Margin: 5 px 15 px 0 0 px; stroke: 1 pixel solid #999; Width: 150 pixels;”/>|
Are courts going down the rabbit hole?
In the copyright case, Switzerland’s highest court sided with the chocolate company Lindt, which had ordered its competitor, the German company Lidl, to destroy all Easter bunnies that were supposedly similar to Lindt rabbits. Both versions have gold lids and bells, but those with Lindt have red bows and green lids. The court thought consumers might be confused.
Give me a break. If consumers in Switzerland cannot distinguish between red and green, they should not operate cars. I wouldn’t feel comfortable at all driving along a narrow alpine road with any of these guys zooming in. I certainly wouldn’t ask any of them for directions.
Interestingly, the Commercial Court of First Instance ruled in Liddell’s favour. It seems that even judges can’t all agree on the errors. The bottom line is that for Lidl, this little bunny isn’t going to the market. Liddle rabbits will not reproduce.
But all is not completely lost. The court ruled that Lidl may now melt all of its stock. In fact, I Googled the name of a group of rabbits and to my surprise, the group is called “fluffle”. It looks like falafel.
But then again, wouldn’t it be a pity to destroy the entire lint? After all they are certainly aesthetic and decorative. I wonder if Lidl could at least hand out some of these green ribbon products destined for their attorneys as gifts.
Are their lawyers contravening the court’s ruling by accepting them? Can they take risks? Who is the lawyer who wants his house to be broken into by something like the Swiss chocolate guards. They attack with a chocolate rabbit that is specially trained to sniff out a beagle. Hounds easily find barred rabbits. The lawyer says he only had a couple in his possession. And for personal use. The chief guard says, “Did not matter. You are in possession of prohibited items. You are under arrest. The court ordered the destruction of the entire pile “.
Badda bing boom!
Similar actions regarding fake animals appear to have taken place among large companies
Last year Marks and Spencer sued German supermarket giant Aldi, in the High Court of England, claiming that Aldi’s Cuthbert cake was too similar to its Colin the Caterpillar cake.
I can see how Marks and Spencer can get their knickers in knots over this kind of trick. Imagine Cuthbert, trying to impersonate Colin Caterpillar. I will not bear it.
Given the gracious atmosphere of the British High Court, the hearing in this case may seem a little strange. I imagine a team of lawyers in robes and wigs presenting their formal arguments:
Advocate Advocate: Your honor will certainly not see any resemblance between Cuthbert and Colin. The two caterpillars are not at all on all fours. Hermph!
I sympathize with the defendant, indeed. In my opinion there is no doubt that every brand has its loyal following. It’s like sports. I grew up in Montreal. Once he’s a Habs fan, he’s always a Habs fan. My kids are die-hard foliage lovers.
So the same with those cakes. A Cuthbert fan would have nothing to do with Colin Caterpillar.
And don’t ask me what a group of larvae is called. Siri asked and she replied, “Ask me another question. you are strange.”
By the way, the case was settled this year. I wonder how. The agreement is confidential. An Aldi spokesperson said, “Cuthbert is free and looks forward to seeing all of his fans very soon.”
What did they do to Cuthbert? Turn him into a butterfly?
And speaking of sweets, I regret to report that a truck carrying a full load of candy lost its load after colliding with another truck on Highway 99 in California. I don’t have a lot of information, but the good news is that neither rabbits nor larvae are infected.
Marcel Strigberger retired from litigation practice in the Greater Toronto Area and continued the more serious work of the author and humorous speaker. writing Boomers, Zoomers, and Others: A Non-Protection Perspective Biased to the Boom on Aging Now available in hard copy and e-book where books are sold. visit www.marcelshumour.com. follow him Tweet embed.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the author’s company and its clientsLawyer’s daily newspaper LexisNexis Canada, or any of its affiliates or affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended and should not be considered legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? Learn more about how to add your voice to it Daily lawyerContact analysis editor Peter Carter at [email protected] Or call 647-776-6740.
#falafel #Marcel #Strieberger