Escobar Brother Barred by EU Court From Trademarking Family Name (bloomberg.com) 17
Pablo Escobar, the name of the late Colombian drug kingpin, can't be registered as a trademark in the European Union after judges said that approving his brother's bid would go against "principles of morality." From a report: The public "associate that name with drug trafficking and narco-terrorism and with the crimes and suffering resulting therefrom, rather than with his possible good deeds in favor of the poor in Colombia," the EU's General Court in Luxembourg said on Wednesday. Trademarking the name is "counter to the fundamental values and moral standards prevailing within Spanish society," the court said.
Judgment of the General Court in Case T-255/23 (Score:3)
"On 30 September 2021, Escobar Inc., established in Puerto Rico (United States), filed an application with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) for registration of the word sign Pablo Escobar as an EU trade mark for a wide range of goods and services.
The Colombian national named Pablo Escobar, who was born on 1 December 1949 and died on 2 December 1993, is presumed to be a drug lord and a narco-terrorist who founded and was the sole leader of the Medellín cartel (Colombia).
EUIPO rejected the application for registration on the ground that the mark was contrary to public policy and to accepted principles of morality. It relied on the perception of the Spanish public, as it is the most familiar with Pablo Escobar due to the links between Spain and Colombia.
Escobar Inc. brought an action against that decision before the General Court of the European Union. The Court upholds the refusal to register the trade mark Pablo Escobar. According to the Court, EUIPO could rely, in its assessment, on the perception of reasonable Spaniards, with average sensitivity and tolerance thresholds and who share the indivisible and universal values on which the European Union is founded (human dignity, freedom, equality and solidarity, and the principles of democracy and the rule of law and the right to life and physical integrity).
EUIPO correctly found that those persons would associate the name of Pablo Escobar with drug trafficking and narco-terrorism and with the crimes and suffering resulting therefrom, rather than with his possible good deeds in favour of the poor in Colombia 1. The trade mark would therefore be perceived as running counter to the fundamental values and moral standards prevailing within Spanish society.
The Court adds that Pablo Escobar’s fundamental right to the presumption of innocence has not been infringed because, even though he was never criminally convicted 2, he is publicly perceived in Spain as a symbol of organised crime responsible for numerous crimes."
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/j... [europa.eu]
Re: (Score:2)
Well that's some high level doubletalk there. The point of courts is that people are supposed to respect the decisions as being justified by law in some fashion. Instead, the decision could be rewritten "F him, he sucks".
Re:Judgment of the General Court in Case T-255/23 (Score:4, Informative)
Trademark law has provisions to deny brand registration that are contrary to public order, or are otherwise forbidden concepts in the given country (for example you cannot trademark "Rape Inc." for a dating app).
In this case, Escobar Inc. builds its reputation on the criminal past of Pablo Escobar and his brother. Their customers enjoy to own Escobar-branded smartphones, which they purchase for the sole purpose of their admiration for the name. There clearly is intention to create a public outrage, and this is what trademark law allows the registration office to refuse.
It's not the case of an unrelated guy who opened his small "Escobar's pizza corner" and is being denied his livelihood. Escobar Inc. well intends to call to the criminal past of their founder. It was originally founded by Pablo Escobar with the help of his brother Roberto (also a drug trafficker at the time), as a means of money laundering. The current hired CEO of Escobar Inc. sleeps in a Spanish jail and is awaiting extradition to the USA on charges of for money laundering, fraud, art smuggling.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem ia , the court has declared Escobar as a word thats forever associated with evil, and thats a real problem for anyone with that name.
Some surnames can probably never be rehabilitated. Theres a reason you wont find anyone with the last name "Hitler". But that was both a combination of Adolf Hitler being a genuine history-changing scumbag AND the fact that there where only a handful or so of people in the world with that name, and all of them changed their name post-war.
Pablo Escobar was also a hi
Re: (Score:2)
The brand name applied to be protected was "Pablo Escobar", contrary to implied by the slashdot headline, but in accordance with the first words of the slashdot summary.
I don't think the court decided that (Pablo) Escobar was evil forever. From the full Court decision:
18. [...] it is necessary to take account [...] the particular circumstances of individual Member States which are likely to influence the perception of the relevant public within those States
19. [...] in the present case, the existence of the ground for refusal referred to in Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation 2017/1001 in relation to the Spanish public, on the ground that that was the public most familiar with the Colombian national called Pablo Escobar, [...] on account of the privileged links, in particular historical links, between Spain and Colombia.
The argument from EUIPO, quoted by the Court, refers to the specific perception in Spain where the brand was applied for protection. This leaves open for future Pablo Escobars to be successful in applying for trademark protection either in ano
I don't get it (Score:2)
Trademark for what? Drug trade? Did he have some other non-drug funded trade? You can't trademark illegal activity and you can only trademark the specific trade you're engaged in. For example, in theory, you can call your T-shirt company "Apple" .. because Apple doesn't sell T-shirts. OK, Apple may be a bad example because they are so big and do sell Apple T-shirts in their corporate store. But you get my point. There's the Apple Inc and there's a different company which is a music label Apple records: http [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
This can be flipped around (Score:2)
Who can be Escobar?? Since it cannot be trademarked, we can now all be Escobar! Technically it is then public domain.
Not that anyone would want to be, but still, that makes the outcome potentially funny.
Re: (Score:2)
Since it cannot be trademarked, we can now all be Escobar!
Well it means they cannot formally register the trademark with the EU.
Some countries, even some EU countries grant common law protection for unregistered trademarks.
In those places you can sue over infringement of an Unregistered trademark; they might not currently meet the criteria to do so.. but the situation doesn't put it automatically Public Domain worldwide.
They may also be able to register their trademark locally within some countries even i
Re: (Score:2)
In my neighborhood, there's Pablo's Escoburgers.
https://www.sbs.com.au/languag... [sbs.com.au]
Claiming trademark? That horse bolted a long time ago.
Just as well... (Score:2)
Escobar Brother Barred by EU Court From Trademarking Family Name
It's also the Inuit name for a Klondike Bar [wikipedia.org], and that would be confusing.
[ Admit it, you don't know if that's true. :-) ]