Kiddinx Studios GmbH v. SC Certinvest Srl

Kiddinx Studios GmbH

Case details

Case no.: R1979/2022-5

Jurisdiction: European Union

Industry: Media

Decision date: 17 May, 2023


The relevant public consists of both the public at large and professionals. The degree of attention of the relevant public is considered to vary from average in relation to the relevant goods in Class 3 to at least above average in relation to the relevant goods in Class 5. The goods at issue are partly identical and partly similar. The signs are visually similar to a below-average degree and aurally similar to an average degree, whereas the conceptual comparison remains neutral or, in any event, does not decisively influence the comparison between the signs. Finally, the inherent distinctiveness of the earlier mark is normal. In light of the foregoing, there is reason to assume that (at least) a significant part of the relevant public will be misled into thinking that the goods bearing the signs in dispute come from the same or economically linked undertakings. Even a highly attentive public, without directly confusing the signs, may believe that the contested sign concerns a sub-brand of the earlier mark for another line of goods.

Comparison of Trademarks

Bibi & Tina