BY AURELIA MITCHELL DURANT Globalization has become a reality for the planet. The very loose and fluid definition of globalization is summed in an often-quoted quote by former Secretary-General of...
Originally posted 2014-11-25 11:00:56.
By Gloria Han | amdlawgroup.com
Lush is a beauty brand that produces products from fresh organic fruit and vegetables. Their products such as makeup, soap, and face wash are not animal tested and are made fresh by hand with little or no preservative. Lush brand chose not to sell their products on Amazon but when customers searched “lush” into the search bar, similar beauty products sold by Lush appeared in the results. Before resolving the issue in court, Lush trademarked the name “Christopher North” as a brand for new toiletries resembling the name of the Amazon UK’s boss, North. In order to get the attention of North, Lush launched a new shower gel under the “Christopher North” brand with the tagline “rich, thick, and full of it”. The trademark was initially a joke until Amazon refused to admit any wrongdoing. The High Court concluded that Amazon’s use of the Lush trademark negatively affected the advertising and investment functions of Lush’s trademark. The High Court also stated that Amazon did not have the right to treat trademarks as no more than a generic class of goods. The Lush trademark is a unique brand that consumers might have an interest in.
Lush has stated that its concern did not lie so much in Amazon using the Lush trademark in its search engines, but the loss of the potential customers. Customers would mistake copycat products sold on Amazon as Lush products. Lush’s business is grounded on ethical integrity and claimed it will always protect its name.