|
Let's see Apple wants to own all "i+word" designations, BMW want to own "M+number", Nissan wants to own "number+Z" and now "M+number"
Letter+number designations like common everyday words in general are difficult to defend as trademarks, even if in combination. So advertising and promoting M6 as a standalone brand identifier even if BMW is in the fine print is the issue here.
Most of us don't just say we own an "M". It's qualified with either M3, M5 or M6. And that is uniquely and unmistakingly identifiable as a BMW motorsport edition vehicle. In large part trademark defence is based on first and consistent utilization of the marque and BMW have been using this designation since the mid to late 1980's (M3, M6). So by my reckoning you have a marque that has had a history of use with unique brand identification. This in my mind constitutes the perfect description of a trademark. iLove (oops need to pay Apple) my M6 and iPhone, and the appellate court got it wrong since it's not about "M" it's about the brand designation and value and historical usage of "M6".
I guess now in Canada a BMW ad would need to have the additional brand qualifier "BMW M6". And then on the opposite page you'd have the Nissan M6, the great pretender.
Stupid decision, and stupid Nissan for thinking they can really capture the essence of the BMW M brand just through copycat naming. I don't think this branding strategy for Nissan will work in the long run as most owners of a fake M6 will be continually questioned if the Rolex on their wrist was bought on a the streets of Hong Kong. That's what happens when you can't build a product with enough appeal that it can stand alone as a brand that people would want for years and years. You resort to trying to fool consumers that you also have the real McCoy at half the price. NOT!
__________________
Never enough horsepower 
|
Linear Mode
