Is it really confusing? For the energy drink brand, yes, since Monster Energy sues Pokemon for using the word ‘monster’. because it could confuse consumers, according to them. However, the company has a long, and painful, history of trademark claims.
Only in Japan Monster Energy has filed 134 objections to trademark registration with the Patent Office. According to the Japanese media, AutomatonMonster Energy opposed the registration of Pokemon X, Pokemon Y, Pokemon Sun, and Pokemon Moon. In addition, in the long list are the brand Monster Hunter and the video game Monster Hunter Generations.
Apparently the brand has a certain fondness for being the only one to have the floor ‘Monster’ as title. The reason? Monster Energy believes those names could lead to confusion over that word..
So what does demand for Pokémon have to do with the equation? The energy drink brand argues that the original title of the franchise was redundant and inseparable: Pocket Monsters (in Japanese ポケットモンスタ or “pocket monsters”). In the eastern country, the full name is still used in addition to its abbreviation, pokemon owned by nintendo.
Monster Energy doesn’t get tired
Although the persecution is mostly towards Japanese patents, it has also escalated to the West against the horror game. Dark Deception: Monsters & Mortals. For this reason, the indie study Glow Stick Entertainment will go to court so you don’t have to change the name of your product.
“Monster Energy is an abuser owned by Coca-Cola. I hope that one day they learn that going after game studios is not in their best interests,” he said in Twitter Vincent Livings, founder and CEO of Glowstick.
On the other hand, in 2020, something similar happened when Ubisoft yes, he had to make the modification to the original title of the video game Gods & Monsters to Immortals: Fenyx Rising.
In Japan, the Patent Office said that there is no risk of confusion in the cases filed, therefore Monster Energy has lost all disputes.
But the story does not stop there, in March 2023, the brand sued a small restaurant in Ohio, United States for using ‘Monster’ on its sign.
Ridiculous or justified claims for trademark use?
But, it is not the only one. Although it may sound ridiculous at times, there are brands that go from legal to apprehensive regarding their logos or names. There are thousands of examples of this, however, the most prominent are Manzana, who defends his famous apple tooth and nail. one more is adidaswhich believes that anyone who uses three parallel stripes in their logo can confuse consumers.
However, among the most notorious cases is that of United Kingdom against a Mexican entrepreneur for calling ‘Taquería’ to his business in London. Also, the demand for Jack Daniel’s against the company VIP Products LLC, for launching a bottle similar to the brand of bourbon but in the form of a dog toy.
On the other hand, of course, there are justified demands, such as that of Hermes against the NFT artist who was selling Birkin bags.
When is the line drawn between trademark use and imaginary confusion? What do you think?
Editorial Team The editorial team of EMPRENDEDOR.com, which for more than 27 years has worked to promote entrepreneurship.