Fight between Goliath and David: Lacoste warns Mühlacker startup!

Fight between Goliath and David: Lacoste warns Mühlacker startup!

Mühlacker, Deutschland - Felix Huynh, a founder of Mühlacker, is faced with a legal dispute, who has a disproportionate character. Huynh has received a warning from Lacoste, the renowned French company, which is known as a trademark for its striking, grass -green crocodile. Lacoste demands a payment of over 5,000 euros from Huynh and raises a value in dispute of around 500,000 euros because it sees a potential risk of confusion between its brand logo and the known logo of Lacoste.

Huynh operates the "Broccodile" company under construction, which positions itself in the food industry. The logo of "Broccodile" shows a cloud of smoke in the form of a crocodile, supplemented with broccolirous residents. According to the warning, Huynh is to delete the "Broccodile" brand registered with the German Patent and Trademark Office (DPMA). A deadline set for agreement was passed by him, which is why he has to expect a lawsuit by Lacoste.

background and legal framework conditions

warnings of large companies against smaller companies due to trademark violations are not uncommon in today's business world. Experts such as Jens Klaus Fusbahn, specialist lawyer for commercial legal protection, underline the need for brand owners to actively defend their rights. This applies particularly to well -known brands whose economic value and call are endangered by unauthorized use. Companies like Lacoste often enforce their trademark rights to prevent confusion and to preserve the value of their brand.

A warning law, as the one that Huynh received, is typically a legal letter, which includes the requirements for immediate omission of brand use as well as various claims for damages and information. The warning also includes an invitation to submit a punished declaration of cease and desist, so that the legal steps can be enforced in court if the claims are ignored. Brand protection is a central instrument of commercial legal protection that contributes decisively to ensure the brand identity.

financial risks in the event of warnings

The financial implications of a warned person can be significant. In Huynh's case, an inappropriate reaction, such as ignoring the warning, could lead to judicial injunction and further costs. It is known that the warning costs are typically between 1,250 and 5,000 euros. In addition, there may be claims for damages based on loss of brand owners.
Costs can also be driven up by the involvement of patent attacks. Legal support is therefore essential in order to check the warning in detail and, if necessary, formulate a modified declaration of injunctive relief.

In brand protection, companies are often forced to defend their brands by warning to prevent future contamination of their brand name. Hundreds of companies receive warnings annually, whereby a remarkable number of injured brands is a high financial burden, as in the case of Selva Negra Spirits, which received a warning from Jägermeister and their value in dispute was around 250,000 euros

The incidents around Huynh and other small entrepreneurs illustrate the challenges with which many small companies are faced with the shadow of large brands. Remszeitung reports that there were already around 50,000 registered brands in 2022, of which around 2,200 were attacked with an objection. Huynh now remains in an uncertain Situation, while the objection procedure for "broccodile" is running at the DPMA.

The situation of Felix Huynh is an impressive example of the challenges that startups and small companies in the field of trademark law have to deal with. It remains to be hoped that a fair and proper solution will be found to secure the advancing development of "broccodile".

For more information on the topic of the brand warnings and their legal framework, we refer to the IT-Recht law firm and Marken.legal .