Counterfeiting attack when a French company Apple in court

Counterfeiting attack when a French company Apple in court

Screenshot of the launch of the operating system Mac OS X Lion Apple.
Screenshot of the launch of the operating system Mac OS X Lion Apple.
 A French post-production visual effects based in Montrouge, Hauts-de-Seine, is engaged in a legal battle with the Californian giant Apple. The cause of discord The use of the term "Lion." The French Circus shouts counterfeiting and asked the court to prohibit Apple from using the name "Lion" and "Lion Mountain", which means the two versions of its operating system Mac OSX. Circus denies the use of these names since she left herself the name "Lion" in France in April 2010.

"Even before Apple claims that name and does not communicate its intention to use it to designate the latter system (operating) OSX" according Circus. The hearing on the merits is a new episode of the proceedings by the company Circus. The third civil chamber of the tribunal de grande instance de Paris will make its decision on November 22, told AFP Circus lawyer, Jean Aittouares. The company, which employs fifteen people, requires twice 200,000 euros in provisions on damages for "Lion" and "Lion Mountain". Affirming an order of the referee, the Paris Court of Appeal had recognized 13 September that "if the likely damage to the brand which is characterized Circus owns" it would be disproportionate to prohibit the use of the name Apple.

 The Court of Appeal considered that Circus does not use the name "Lion" and suffers "no harm other than trademark infringement as such." It was revised upward provisions must pay Apple Circus, with 1 500 to 50 000 euros. Circus camp but did not budge and Me Aittouares The lawyer says: "It is as if to say" you left your fallow ground, I built my building above. '" The graphics software and post-production that wants to appoint Circus "Lion" is "in development" and requires a total of five years of development. At the first hearing in this proceeding, before the judge, counsel for Apple had ruled out any risk of confusion between the two products and found that there was "no trademark infringement."


share this article to: Facebook Twitter Google+ Linkedin Technorati Digg
Posted by ADMIN, Published at 10:07 PM and have 0 comments

No comments:

Post a Comment