Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
14 August 2002
Hearing Officer
Mr M Knight
09, 28
Kabushiki Kaisha Namco (Namco Ltd)
The Edge Interactive Media Inc; & The Edge Interactive Media Ltd
Sections 3(1)(b); 3(1)(c); 3(1)(d); 3(6); 5(2)(b) & 5(4)(a)


Section 3(1)(b) - Opposition failed.

Section 3(1)(c) - Opposition failed.

Section 3(1)(d) - Opposition failed.

Section 3(6) - Opposition failed.

Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed.

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed.

Points Of Interest

  • Comparison of the marks EDGE v SOULEDGE.


The Hearing Officer dismissed all the grounds under Section 3 as the evidence submitted was insufficient to support any such objections; factors relating to the market in the USA were 'not determinative', circumstances in the two markets (UK & USA) could be different.

Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer had to consider the clash between the opponents’ EDGE marks, and the applicants’ marks SOULEDGE. The applicants goods in Classes 9 and 28 were the same as or similar to the opponents’ goods in Class 9, he decided. The marks were not similar, he thought, but he went on to consider the distinctive character of the opponents’ mark and its reputation. Having done so he decided that there was no likelihood of confusion. The Section 5(2)(b) ground failed accordingly.

This finding effectively decided the matter under Section 5(4)(a) since the dissimilarity of the marks made misrepresentation unlikely; the evidence of reputation was also insufficient, noted the Hearing Officer.

Full decision O/337/02 PDF document29Kb