I suspect Rudy Huyn felt quite safe applying for a trademark for 6Studio, his brand built-up after a range of 6-named apps like 6tag, 6Snap and Cloud6.
It turns out that confidence was misplaced, as an unlikely entity has objected against his application.
In a legal letter of objection Beats Electronics note that in Class 9 (Computer & Software Products & Electrical & Scientific Products) there exist a possibility of confusion between their brands, due to buyers being confused by the Studio part which are in both 6Studio and Beats Studio, a type of Beats headphones.
See the full letter after the break.
We will contact you on behalf of our client , the company Beats Electronics LLC. The latter is proprietor of the Community trade mark No 011131125 BEATS STUDIO filed August 21, 2012 and recorded September 5, 2013 to designate headphones in class 9 .
Beats Electronics LLC has noticed that you filed the application for registration of French brand No. 14 4065237 6STUDIO February 2, 2014 for goods in classes 9 , 38 and 42. However , this deposit refers to goods in Class 9 which are similar to the aforementioned protected by the earlier mark our client products.
Moreover, the signs in question are very similar, the STUDIO element of the earlier mark our client is reproduced in your brand. It follows therefore a significant risk of confusion for consumers as to the true origin of the goods in class 9 .
For this reason and the opposition period expiring April 21, 2014 , our client has already lodged an objection against your registration application, which you will find attached a copy of the brief .
I suspect the request is rather ridiculous, but that Rudy will likely not waste resources fighting it in court.
A polite note to [email protected] letting them know how misplaces their concerns are does not however seem too unreasonable.
Do our readers agree?