Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Mirage Studios v Counter-Feat Clothing

[1991] F.S.R. 145

Case summary last updated at 02/02/2020 21:01 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Mirage Studios v Counter-Feat Clothing

C was a company set up to exploit marketing potential of ‘Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles’. D asked for licence to use Turtles on their clothing, but was refused. D then got an artist to draw his own version of humanoid turtles which similar to C’s, which were then used on C’s clothing. Held:
 
·        There is arguable case of passing off
·        Misrepresentation
Ø  Substantial number of buying public believe that where a cartoon character has been reproduced, this is as result of a licence.
Ø  Thus there is a misrepresentation by D.
-        i.e. as substantial number of public will believe there is some connection between D and C.
·        Damage
Ø  Damage to C is loss of chance to obtain royalties.
Ø  Such loss of royalties may result from:
i)         Fall in market value of licence (as D’s use of character makes character less exclusive)
ii)       Loss of money caused by D’s failure to take a licence
-        i.e. as goods that could have been made under licence from C (by D or someone else) are being made elsewhere

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Intellectual Property Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

  • Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
  • Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form
  • Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
  • Covers all major cases for LLB exams
  • Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
  • Recently updated
Intellectual Property Law Notes

Intellectual Property Law Notes >>