Europe: Messi scores trade mark goal at EU General Court

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Europe: Messi scores trade mark goal at EU General Court

After a seven year fight, the EU General Court has ruled that world famous football star Lionel Messi may register a logo including his surname MESSI as a trade mark for sports equipment and clothing. The mark had been challenged by a Spanish cycling gear manufacturer who owns the mark MASSI.

MESSI v MASSI

In 2011, Messi sought to register a logo (depicted below), including an emblem featuring the letter "M" and the surname Messi underneath as an EU trade mark.

messi.jpg

The mark was applied for, among others, clothing, footwear, gymnastics and sports articles. In November 2011 Jaime Masferrer Coma filed an opposition against the registration of the mark based on an earlier EU trade mark, MASSI, registered for, inter alia, clothing, shoes, bicycle helmets, protective clothing and cycle gloves. Mr Coma claimed that the signs were too similar and would cause confusion in the market.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) ruled in favour of Jaime Coma in 2011, finding that there was a likelihood of confusion between the marks, due to the similarity of the dominant parts of the marks. It was of the opinion that the terms MASSI and MESSI are almost identical from a visual and phonetic point of view and that only a small part of the relevant public would make a possible conceptual distinction between the marks. The decision was upheld by the EUIPO and later confirmed by the Board of Appeal.

Well-known public figure

Messi appealed against the decision before the General Court of the European Union. The General Court disagreed with the EUIPO and annulled the earlier decision. According to the General Court a large part of the relevant public is familiar with Messi being a celebrity with a lot of media exposure. As a consequence, the majority of the public is likely to link the term MESSI to the name of the well-known football player, even more so given the goods in question.

No likelihood of confusion

Conceptual differences may under certain circumstances counteract visual or phonetic similarity between signs. This rule is only applicable when at least one of the marks at issue has a clear and determined meaning enabling the relevant public to seize it immediately. The other mark must have no such meaning or an entirely different meaning.

The General Court found that the fame enjoyed by Messi gives MESSI a clear and determined meaning. Furthermore, MESSI is clearly distinguishable from the word MASSI, which does not have any specific meaning, except in Italian where it could mean "large stones". In conclusion, the conceptual differences neutralise the visual and phonetic similarities between the marks in question and any likelihood of confusion is therefore excluded.

pardoen.jpg

Myrthe Pardoen


V.O.Carnegieplein 5, 2517 KJThe HagueThe NetherlandsTel: +31 70 416 67 11Fax: +31 70 416 67 99info@vo.euwww.vo.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article