For the whole decision click here: o46502
Result
Section 3(6): - No formal finding.
Section 5(2)(b): - Opposition successful.
Section 5(4)(a) - No formal finding.
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opposition was based on a registration of the mark 'e.comment', in Classes 16 and 42. The Hearing Officer noted first that the goods and services were identical and the earlier trade mark had 'no more than a modest degree of distinctive character'. After a careful analysis of the marks the Hearing Officer recorded his view that consumers were "likely to articulate rather than ignore the full stop (dot) of the opponents mark". This rendered the marks 'phonetically similar to a substantial extent'.
Having considered all the factors the Hearing Officer found a likelihood of confusion. The opposition under Section 5(2)(b) succeeded accordingly and the Hearing Officer did not go on to consider the objections under Sections 3(6) or 5(4)(a).