Insight · Trade Marks (EU/EUIPO)
Figurative “polo club” mark survives: lessons for lifestyle brands
Summary: The EUIPO’s Board of Appeal rejected a renewed challenge to BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB, finding the figurative polo imagery wasn’t deceptive merely for evoking club/exclusivity values. The deciding factors were consistent brand use and evidence of distinctiveness. For fashion and lifestyle brands, evocative imagery can still function as a source identifier—if your evidence file is robust.
Why it matters
- Figurative elements that suggest lifestyle or sport can be upheld where consumers read them as branding—not institutional affiliation.
- Your evidence stack (use, recognition, markets, dates) is decisive for both defence and enforcement.
What to do next
- Audit your files: collect dated ads, lookbooks, packaging, sales, and consumer press—by territory (supports registration and defence).
- Claims control: avoid implying official affiliation (clubs, federations) without licence; align marketing with your licensing framework.
- Clearance discipline: compare figurative cues, not just words; consider survey/market context for high-risk launches (esp. fashion & modelling sectors).
- Opposition playbooks: maintain ready-to-deploy evidence bundles for EUIPO oppositions and appeals.
Key points
- Evocative imagery ≠ per se deception.
- Consistency and dated records win cases.
- Watch for “implied endorsement” risks (clubs, institutions, governing bodies).
Sources
- Bird & Bird BrandWrites note: brandwrites.twobirds.com