Skip to content
Fashion

Fashion group fails to block Mango Seed trademark

By Aiko Tanaka
1 min read
mango
mango
In this article (5)

Spanish fashion retailer Mango has failed to block Korean skincare brand The Face Shop from registering a trademark in Singapore for its Mango Seed range.

Consolidated Artists, the trademark owner of Mango, objected to The Face Shop bid on the basis of its earlier trademarks for Mango and Mango Adorably, under which it produces goods such as soap, perfumes and cosmetics.

However, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) registrar has ruled that the trademarks look and sound different, and are “more dissimilar than similar in totality”.

While the Mango trademark had “some level of distinctiveness” in terms of its font, it was nevertheless “not highly distinctive” as it could otherwise be considered descriptive of the products in that they could be mango-flavoured or scented.

The registrar said the same considerations applied to the Mango Seed trademark of The Face Shop, as the retailer was legally defined in the application. The registrar noted the Korean brand’s trademark included the “particularly long word The Face Shop”, which was “allusive and can be regarded as distinctive of the relevant goods”.

Regarding the likelihood of confusion, the registrar ruled there was no risk of misperception of co-branding or any likelihood of confusion in the sense of an economic link between the parties.

While Mango had consistently used its trademark in a particular font, it could not be confused with the Mango Seed trademark, even though the word “seed” was related to the word “mango”.

IPOS also said that cosmetics and self-care products were “highly personal” and consumers would be more particular about the origin or trademarks of such goods, and trust some brands more than others.

Questions & Answers

Q.

What was the main reason Mango objected to The Face Shop's trademark application?

A.

Mango objected because it already held trademarks for 'Mango' and 'Mango Adorably', under which it produced goods including soap, perfumes, and cosmetics. They aimed to prevent The Face Shop from registering 'Mango Seed'.

Q.

Why did the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) rule against Mango?

A.

IPOS ruled the trademarks looked and sounded different, being 'more dissimilar than similar in totality'. They also noted consumers are particular about cosmetics, reducing confusion risk. There was no likelihood of an economic link being perceived.

Q.

How did IPOS assess the distinctiveness of Mango's trademark?

A.

IPOS found the Mango trademark had 'some level of distinctiveness' due to its font but was 'not highly distinctive'. This was because 'Mango' could be considered descriptive if the products were mango-flavoured or scented.

Q.

What role did the word 'seed' play in the IPOS decision?

A.

IPOS acknowledged that 'seed' was related to 'mango' but still ruled no confusion was likely. This was because Mango's consistent font use and The Face Shop's longer trademark, including 'The Face Shop', made them distinct.

Reader pulse

Was Mango's challenge justified?

22,612 votes so far

Weekly Briefing

Asia's retail intelligence, in your inbox

Monday, Wednesday and a Friday Weekly Wrap: the retail stories, numbers and moves that mattered across Asia. Nothing else, and you can unsubscribe in one click.

  • Top industry moves and market shifts
  • Weekly data-driven analysis from across Asia
  • Monday, Wednesday and the Friday Weekly Wrap

Read by retail operators, investors and brand teams across Asia.

Protected by a quick human check. No spam, ever. Unsubscribe in one click.

SecureGDPR ready