Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 145 views

    Fruit of The Loom vs. CA

    Uploaded by

    Teoti Navarro Reyes
    The Supreme Court ruled that there was no trademark infringement between Fruit of the Loom and Fruit for Eve. While the businesses sold similar products and the hang tags had some similarities, the Court found the differences in the trademarks and hang tags to be more prominent. Specifically, the Court determined that the common word "Fruit" alone was not enough to confuse buyers or show that one company was copying the other.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Fruit of The Loom vs. CA

    Uploaded by

    Teoti Navarro Reyes
    145 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that there was no trademark infringement between Fruit of the Loom and Fruit for Eve. While the businesses sold similar products and the hang tags had some similarities, the Court found the differences in the trademarks and hang tags to be more prominent. Specifically, the Court determined that the common word "Fruit" alone was not enough to confuse buyers or show that one company was copying the other.

    Original Description:

    law

    Original Title

    (106) Fruit of the Loom vs. CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that there was no trademark infringement between Fruit of the Loom and Fruit for Eve. While the businesses sold similar products and the hang tags had some similarities, the Court found the differences in the trademarks and hang tags to be more prominent. Specifically, the Court determined that the common word "Fruit" alone was not enough to confuse buyers or show that one company was copying the other.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    145 views1 page

    Fruit of The Loom vs. CA

    Uploaded by

    Teoti Navarro Reyes
    The Supreme Court ruled that there was no trademark infringement between Fruit of the Loom and Fruit for Eve. While the businesses sold similar products and the hang tags had some similarities, the Court found the differences in the trademarks and hang tags to be more prominent. Specifically, the Court determined that the common word "Fruit" alone was not enough to confuse buyers or show that one company was copying the other.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    FRUIT OF THE LOOM, INC. v.

    COURT OF APPEALS and GENERAL


    GARMENTS CORPORATION. G.R. No. L-32747. November 29, 1984
    FACTS:
    Petitioner is a corporation who owns the trademark Fruit of the Loom wherein the business is the selling
    of underwear.
    Respondent is a domestic corporation who owns the trademark Fruit for Eve whose business is similar to
    petitioners.
    Petitioner filed before the lower a complaint for trademark infringement and unfair competition against
    respondent citing that their names and hang tags are confusingly similar and is a colorable imitation.
    The trial court held in favor of petitioner. Respondent then appealed to the CA wherein the decision was
    reversed. The CA held that the word Fruit is a generic word, thus is not capable of exclusive appropriation
    and that petitioner is not entitled to the exclusive use of every word in their trademark.

    ISSUE: Whether there is trademark infringement.


    RULING:
    No. The SC stated that the there is no confusing similarity which would deceive buyers. The SC declared
    that the word Fruit in both goods is not enough to show that buyers will get confused over such. It was not
    the dominant feature of both products.
    In relation to the hang tags, the SC did find similarities but the differences were more glaring and striking,
    The similarities of the competing trademarks in this case are completely lost in the substantial differences
    in the design and general appearance of their respective hang tags

    You might also like