Sazerac wins partial victory in LIV Golf trademark dispute
The European Union’s IP office has partially upheld American spirits company Sazerac’s trademark complaints against the LIV Golf tour.
Sazerac initially took action against LIV Golf’s trademark application for ‘Fireballs GC’ in 2022 when the tour launched. The spirits firm claimed it could be confused with its own Fireball Cinnamon Whisky brand, for which it holds the trademark ‘Fireball’.
Fireballs GC is the name of a LIV golf team captained by Sergio García.
Sazerac argued that similarities between the two names might lead the public to believe that goods and entertainment services bearing ‘Fireballs GC’ come from the same entity.
The spirits firm sought to oppose the use of Fireballs GC for clothing under trademark class 25 – such as t-shirts, footwear, headgear and socks – where confusion could exist when found on identical goods.
It also contested the use of Fireballs GC for entertainment services relating to professional golf, which can be tournaments, matches, competitions and exhibitions, under trademark class 41.
In a ruling on Wednesday (7 January), the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) assessed that “the small differences in the less noticeable elements and aspects” of the signs are “not sufficient to counteract the high visual, aural and conceptual similarities and to exclude the likelihood of confusion for identical goods”.
This is “taken from the fact that average consumers rarely have the chance to make a direct comparison between different marks, but must trust in their imperfect recollection of them”, the office explained.
The EUIPO found therefore to be a “likelihood of confusion on the part of the English-speaking part of the public” on clothing items and rejected LIV Golf’s trademark application for all goods that fall under class 25.
Sazerac, however, was unsuccessful in its entertainment services claim.
Sazerac’s ‘Fireball’ trademark is registered for ‘whisky’ in class 33, which the EUIPO said is “clearly different” to the services covered in class 41.
The EUIPO noted that they “do not have the same natures, purposes or methods of use and they do not share the same distribution channels” and, furthermore, “the goods and services under comparison are neither complementary to each other nor in competition, and they are not usually produced or provided by the same undertakings.”
The Spirits Business has reached out to Sazerac for comment.
Sazerac is also facing a lawsuit that alleges it misled customers with malt-based versions of Fireball and Parrot Bay. In September last year, a judge approved a request for a class action lawsuit to proceed.
Related news
Sazerac to spotlight Svedka in Super Bowl commercial
