Corona owner: we have opposed 100 trademark applications

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

Corona owner: we have opposed 100 trademark applications

corona-600-compressed.jpg

The in-house lawyer responsible for protecting the ‘Corona’ trademark has noticed a significant uptick in enforcement activity

The brewing company that owns the Corona beer brand has taken action against around 100 trademark applications since the COVID-19 pandemic struck earlier this year, a senior in-house lawyer for the company has revealed.

Federico Bueno Icaza, global IP director at AB InBev, says there has been a significant uptick in trademark enforcement activity as the company seeks to protect the Mexican brand from potentially infringing and opportunistic applications.

Icaza believes he has taken action against roughly 100 applications containing the term ‘Corona’ since February.

“Generally the number of applications [that require action across all brands] tends to fluctuate. But this is a very specific problem – we are probably dealing with about 10 to 15 applications per month,” he tells Managing IP.

Icaza believes the ‘Corona’ trademark – and overall brand, which has been in the market for almost 100 years – is strong.

“In our view, it’s a very strong trademark with a very distinctive trade dress. The longneck transparent bottle, the printed (not stickered) label and its gold colour and crisp taste all contribute to its overall success as a brand.”

Icaza was speaking to Managing IP as part of a wider interview on AB InBev’s IP strategy. The full interview, in which we also speak to Pieter van den Bulck – another global IP director and in charge of AB InBev’s European matters – will be published this week.  



more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lawyers at Lavoix provide an overview of the UPC’s approach to inventive step and whether the forum is promoting its own approach rather than following the EPO
Andrew Blattman, who helped IPH gain significant ground in Asia and Canada, will leave in the second half of 2026
The court ordering a complainant to rank its arguments in order of potential success and a win for Edwards Lifesciences were among the top developments in recent weeks
Frederick Lee has rejoined Boies Schiller Flexner, bolstering the firm’s capabilities across AI, media, and entertainment
Nirav Desai and Sasha S Rao at Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox explore how companies’ efforts to manage tariffs by altering corporate structures can undermine their ability to assert their patents and recover damages
Monika Żuraw, founder of Żuraw & Partners, discusses why IP should be part of the foundation of a business, and taking on projects that others walk away from
Lawyers say attention will turn to the UK government’s AI consultation after judgment fails to match pre-trial hype
Susan Keston and Rachel Fetches at HGF explain why the CoA’s decision to grant the UPC’s first permanent injunction demonstrates the court’s readiness to diverge from national court judgments
IP, M&A, life sciences and competition partners advised on deal that brings together brands such as ‘Huggies’ and ‘Kleenex’ with ‘Band-Aid’ and ‘Tylenol’
Stability AI, represented by Bird & Bird, is not liable for secondary copyright infringement, though Fieldfisher client Getty succeeds in some trademark claims
Gift this article