Logos and no-gos — Lush gets in a lather over Amazon, Adwords and search engines
In Cosmetic Warriors Ltd & Anor v Amazon.co.uk Ltd & Anor  EWHC 181 (Ch), the High Court has held that Amazon infringed Lush’s Community trademark (CTM) by its purchase of the Google Adword ‘Lush’, and by the appearance of the sign ‘Lush’ in Amazon’s own drop-down search box and on returned Amazon search results, on all occasions where it was not made clear that Amazon did not, in fact, sell any of the claimants’ products.
The judgment is a warning to online marketplace operators to ensure that consumers are clearly alerted to the fact that products for which they have searched may not be those that have been returned by the search result, and that in some cases the operator does not even sell the products of the brand searched.
The claimants are the registered proprietor and exclusive licensee of a CTM for the sign ‘Lush’ in respect of cosmetics and toiletries (class 3) and are the self-proclaimed ‘bath bomb’ inventor. Lush has always refrained from selling its products on Amazon.co.uk for ethical reasons…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Macfarlanes briefing.
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Macfarlanes
The new ‘salaried member’ rules, which will treat members of an LLP as employees for tax purposes in certain circumstances, came into force on 6 April 2014.
Privilege denied — defendants’ attempts to withhold disclosure of documents on the grounds of litigation privilege rejected
In two recent cases, it has been held that professionally prepared correspondence and reports were not protected by litigation privilege.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Footie and telecoms dominate our regular round-up of recent M&A activity, as the threat of rising interest rates kick-started activity among organisations.
It’s all kicking off in the mid-level corporate sector, with upstarts such as RPC, FFW and Irwin Mitchell looking to cash in as discerning clients look for value. By Natalie Stanton