NEWS

Registered trade mark FlipFlop cancelled

OLG Zweibrücken of 02.03.2022 – 4U63/21 FlipFlop

 Contents

Sign FlipFlop

Everyone knows the trade mark “FlipFlop” for toe separator sandals. A recent judgement by the Higher Regional Court in Zweibrücken/ Germany will not change this. But as a result of the judgement, the sign “FlipFlop” loses its protection as a registered trademark.

Cancellation application by Havaianas

The suppliers of toe separator sandals labelled “Havaianas” requested to cancel the German word mark “FlipFlop”, which was registered in 1997 (including in class 25 for “footwear”). They argued that the sign “FlipFlop” is a purely descriptive indication of goods and is no longer perceived as an indication of a company.

Distinctive character

A trade mark must be distinctive in order to fulfill its function as an indication of origin, namely to distinguish the goods/services of one company from those of another. If it loses this function because it has become a common term for a product/service, a cancellation  can be request according to § 49 para. 2 no. 1 MarkenG. 

The Higher Regional Court in Zweibrücken granted the application for consent to cancellation. According to the survey of the public (retailers and consumers) carried out by the expert, the trade mark had become a common name for toe separator sandals / footwear. Only a completely insignificant proportion of the public considered the sign as indication of origin. According to the survey, only 14% of traders still associated the trade mark with the company, compared to around 4% of consumers.

Common name

The Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf already addressed the question of whether “flip-flop” had become a common name for toe separator sandals in 2011. At that time, the answer was in the negative. The mere fact that “FlipFlop” was more frequently used as a term for thong sandals is not sufficient. In order to affirm the existence of a common name, it is necessary that only an insignificant part of the public understands it as a designation of origin.

At the point

The registered trade mark is a monopoly right that can represent a considerable value for the owner. It is essential that the owner protects his right and also takes action against use by unauthorised persons. Otherwise there is a risk of losing the right. Even if there are high requirements for the loss of the right, it is very important that trademarks are actively defended by the trade mark owner, in particular well-known trademarks.

MORE NEWS
Trademark Law

AI & Branding: Europe’s brand work between “back to basics” and a GenAI leap

European marketing teams are putting branding back at the top for 2026—while GenAI is still rarely scaled broadly. At the same time, DPMA/EUIPO figures show sustained trademark activity.
Trademark Law

German Federal Court of Justice: No title protection for names of fictional film characters without an independent “life” – “Moneypenny”

The BGH clarifies: A fictional character’s name may in principle enjoy title protection—but only if the character itself is perceived as an independently “designatable” work (part) under trademark law. For “Moneypenny”, the court found insufficient individualisation and no sufficient detachment from the underlying work.
Trademark Law

GPTO enables EU-wide protection of regional products – new rights for craft and industrial goods

DPMA enables protection of geographical indications for industrial products such as knives, porcelain & watches – new EU regulation now in force.
Copyright / Design Law

Copyright protection for utilitarian objects: same test as for other works

The CJEU has held that utilitarian objects and works of applied art are protected by copyright under the same originality standard as any other category of works. It rejects a stricter threshold for everyday objects and provides detailed guidance on how national courts must assess originality and infringement in this context.
Copyright

Memorisation of AI training data infringes copyright

The Regional Court of Munich I has held that the memorisation of copyrighted training data in OpenAI’s GPT models infringes copyright. The judgment reshapes the legal framework for AI training and highlights key compliance risks for AI providers, rightsholders and companies using generative AI.

Using an outdated strikethrough price is misleading

The Wiesbaden Regional Court held that advertising with outdated, significantly higher strike-through prices is misleading and violates the German Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV) in conjunction with the UWG. Consumers understand crossed-out prices as the most recently charged price; if the reference price does not reflect that and there is no clear explanation, the ad suggests an overstated discount. Therefore, strike-through prices must be tied to the price immediately charged before the reduction.

Karin Simon
Lawyer
Certified IP Lawyer

Susanne Graeser
Lawyer
Certified IP Lawyer

Uhlandstr. 2
80336 Munich
Germany

Karin Simon
Rechtsanwältin
Fachanwältin für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz

Susanne Graeser
Rechtsanwältin
Fachanwältin für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz

Uhlandstr. 2
D-80336 München