- Index hide
The fierce legal battle in which both have been involved, has led Zara to prevent registration, for being conceptually identical brands.
This case is added to other precedents such as the one experienced in Mexico between iFone and iPhone, a case that escalated to the SCJN.
Zara is today one of the leading brands in retail and fashion.
Zara has been accused of plagiarism, carrying out infractions in the use of designs that are not its property, cultural appropriation, but now the Spanish brand knows what it means to file a lawsuit and not be a victim of these, because we know of all the complaints with which he has prevented the brand from “Zana” see the light.
The case is similar to that of iPhonea Mexican brand that faced a historic lawsuit against Apple, which tried to prevent said name from going on the market, however, the legal course failed in favor of the Mexican company.
Today we know that brands understand more than ever the value of their names, and it is in this dimension that understanding the market has been facilitated.
The fight between Zara and “Zana”
Go litigation in which they have been involved House of Zanaan English clothing company and the Spanish Zara, after several legal arguments that the latter has planted against the English company, the British company has been unable to register its brand, because they are “conceptually identical”.
The affected English company, which has operations based in Darlington, this in the north of England, still has one last legal resource to be explored on May 24 and that is that until now, Zara’s strongest argument to prevent it from registering “Zana ” It is what moves most companies to fall even in wild lawsuits and legal processes and it is that allowing registration is “diluting the distinctiveness and reputation”.
“We have put all our efforts into creating this unique brand, and after having a hard time during the pandemic, the last thing we want is to be forced to change it, remove all the labels that are sewn onto our stock and change our name on social media and on the internet. store”, explains the English brand after the process in which it seeks to change its name.
iFone, the other trademark case in litigation
iFone is a Mexican company that in 2013 won a lawsuit for brand ownership against the almighty Apple. The information that was revealed at the time, exposed that the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) established that the company directed by Tim Cook could not register in Mexico the one that until now continues to follow one of its most popular products, the iPhone. , for use in telecommunications.
The verdict resulted from a legal process that lasted four years and became the best legal precedent for Eduardo Gallástegui, iPhone defense and responsible for the legal strategy that led to the decision of the SCJN
“A legal, final, definitive and unassailable truth was reached regarding the legitimate use that iFone has given to its brand”, explained in an exclusive interview for the BBC.
Why legal battles between brands become so voracious
The name is everything for a brand and to the extent that it defends its identity, getting rid of brands that are similar in name and sound, it is in that proportion that a series of antecedents have been established, which lead to 4-year trials in litigation such as that of iPhone against iFone or Zara against Zana.
The poles to which brands reach when defending their names patents the capacity they have and the interest there is in being able to define activities that help understand the main brand capacities with which many manage to consolidate, even with powerful legal teams. Such is the case of Disney, which has turned its legal departments into veritable maelstroms with which it has been able to consolidate itself as a brand and exploit it in parks, merchandising, etc.