As the world watches this thrilling final weekend of the 22nd Winter Olympiad, legal competition will rage on even after Sunday’s closing ceremony. In a recent lawsuit from Canada, we are reminded that even an event as glorious as the Olympics can spark a hotly-contested legal battle.
The popular winter apparel company The North Face® is currently embroiled in a legal battle with the Canadian Olympic Committee over trademarks pertaining to the Olympics. The Committee is charging The North Face® with trademark infringement, arguing that The North Face’s “Villagewear Collection” line, later renamed the “International Collection” line, would likely confuse consumers into believing that The North Face® officially sponsors or supports the Canadian Olympic Team. The North Face®, however, is not an official Olympic sponsor.
By way of background, when an entity is granted trademark protection over a word or symbol, the entity can prevent others from using a word or symbol that would be likely to confuse consumers as to the source of a good or service in the marketplace. This likelihood of confusion is at the heart of claims for trademark infringement.
The Committee claims that The North Face® adorned its products with Olympic-style designations, including “RU/14” and “2.7.14,” references to Russia 2014 and the date of the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games, respectively. In addition, the Committee claims that The North Face® marketed an item with the name “Men’s Sochi Full Zip Hoodie” while advertising that its product line “capture[d] the international spirit of the Olympic games.” The Committee, by virtue of its trademark infringement lawsuit, is asking the British Columbia Supreme Court to grant an injunction to force The North Face® to cease its allegedly infringing marketing practices. The Committee is also looking to recoup a monetary award of damages.
The North Face® intends to fight back against the claims. Spokeswoman Ann Krcik stated “The North Face [is] not an official sponsor of the Canadian Olympic Committee or Team Canada and never indicated we were.” Despite this, The North Face® ought to prepare itself for an intense legal battle. In Canada, trademarks referring to the Olympics enjoy special protection under the Olympic and Paralympic Marks Act. During the 2010 Olympic Games in Vancouver the Committee took issue with a Scotiabank advertising campaign directing consumers to “show your [colors]” and demanded that MTS Allstream, a telecommunications company, withhold advertisements featuring Canadian speed skater Cindy Klassen during the course of the Games.
In the case against The North Face®, are consumers likely to be duped into thinking that The North Face® officially sponsors Team Canada or the Canadian Olympic Committee? Would that lead to consumers buying more gear from The North Face®? A successful case for the Committee may require a bit more in the way of consumer surveys or evidence of deceptive trade practices, which can be difficult to prove. So, barring an early disposition, this case could continue for quite some time as the parties seek to bolster their contentions.
One thing’s for sure – companies, especially those based in Canada, ought to be extra careful when marketing in advance of the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio.
(Neeraj Joshi)