Likelihood of Confusion – Alcoholic and Non-Alcoholic Beverages

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) adopts a classification system known as the International Classification of Goods and Services, often referred to as “Nice Classification,” established under the Nice Agreement. This globally-recognized system helps to categorize and standardize different kinds of goods and services into 45 distinct classes—Classes 1-34 for goods and Classes 35-45 for services. These trademark classes play a crucial role in facilitating the trademark registration process, as well as in infringement disputes.

Purpose of Trademark Classification

Just as a department store divides its merchandise into categories like women’s clothing, household appliances, and bed linen to make the shopping experience more navigable, the USPTO’s international trademark classification system aids in:

• Simplifying Searches: It becomes easier to search for pending and registered trademarks that might be similar or related, thus preventing accidental infringement.
• Expedited Examination: An organized system facilitates quicker evaluation and approval by examiners.
• Global Recognition: Because the classification system is internationally accepted, it aids businesses in registering their trademarks in foreign countries.
• Legal Proceedings: Clearly defined classes help in addressing infringement claims and litigations more effectively.

Structure of  Trademark Classes

Goods (Classes 1-34): This includes everything from chemical products (Class 1) to musical instruments (Class 15) to staple foods (Class 30).

For example, Class 25 does not just include dresses and shirts, but a wide range of clothing articles, including scarves, shoes, and even specialized athletic wear.

Services (Classes 35-45): This captures various services like advertising (Class 35), transportation (Class 39), and education (Class 41).

For instance, Class 36 encompasses a broad spectrum of insurance and financial services, such as banking, real estate management, and even services related to the issuance of cryptocurrency.

Importance for Trademark Applicants and Trademark Owners

• Avoiding Overlap: The classification system helps applicants identify whether their intended trademark overlaps with existing trademarks within the same class, thus aiding in making informed decisions.
• Strategic Planning: Businesses can use the classification system to plan their brand expansion. For example, a company initially registered in Class 25 for clothing may decide to venture into Class 18 for leather goods.
• Cost Efficiency: In the U.S., fees are often determined on a per-class basis. By understanding the scope of each class, businesses can optimize the cost of trademark registration and maintenance.
• International Protection: For businesses considering international expansion, having a trademark registered under the Nice Classification helps streamline the process of securing trademark protection overseas.
• Legal Certainty: Ownership of a trademark in a specific class offers a level of legal protection against unauthorized use or infringement within that class.

In summary, the USPTO’s international trademark classification system serves as an indispensable tool for trademark applicants and owners alike. It offers an organized, efficient, and globally recognized framework that benefits everyone from small business owners to multinational corporations.

Coordinated Trademark Classes

The concept of coordinated classes is an essential feature of the USPTO’s trademark registration process, designed to offer a more nuanced approach to trademark searching and identification of potential conflicts. This system acknowledges the commercial realities and consumer perceptions that goods and services from different formal classes may still be closely related or similar in kind, and hence could lead to confusion if similar trademarks are used. For instance, if a company wishes to trademark a brand name for children’s toys in Class 28, it wouldn’t suffice to only look for potential conflicts within that class. It’s essential to also consider coordinated classes such as Class 16 for coloring books or literary works, Class 25 for costumes and clothing, and Class 35 for retail store services, among others.

The reason for this broader search scope is the likelihood of confusion, which is a key metric in determining trademark infringement or conflict. Companies operating in related spheres often branch out into associated goods or services, and consumers are likely to assume a relationship between similar marks in these coordinated classes. The failure to identify and consider such related classes could thus jeopardize not only the application process but also lead to potential legal disputes down the line. For trademark attorneys, understanding coordinated classes is crucial for thorough due diligence during the trademark search process, ensuring they provide comprehensive advice to clients about the feasibility and risks of their chosen trademark. It is a safeguard mechanism that aligns the legal framework more closely with marketplace dynamics and consumer behavior, thereby maintaining the integrity and reliability of registered trademarks. Therefore, coordinated classes serve as an indispensable tool in mitigating the risk of likelihood of confusion, aiding both applicants and trademark owners in successfully navigating the complexities of trademark registration and protection.

Are Alcoholic and Non-Alcoholic Beverages Related or Similar in Kind?

The question of whether similar marks are likely to cause confusion often hinges on several factors, including the strength of the original or “senior” mark, the similarity between the goods or services, and the channels of trade. Case law, such as Best Flavors Inc. v. Mystic River Brewing Co., 886 F.Supp, 908, 36 USPQ2d 1247 (D. Me. 1995), has shown that similar marks appearing on both alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages are often likely to cause confusion due to the closely related nature of these products and the way they are marketed and consumed. For instance, in the case of In re Chatam Intern. Inc., the court emphasized that similarities in marks for beverages could easily lead to customer confusion, given that they are often sold in the same or adjacent aisles in stores and are both intended for consumption. The Ninth Circuit also highlighted this risk when it held that the use of BLACK & WHITE on beer was likely to cause confusion with BLACK & WHITE for Scotch whiskey. The same reasoning was employed by the TTAB in finding that WINEBUD for wine could be confused with BUD for Budweiser beer.

The rationale behind these decisions often involves consideration of consumer behavior and expectations. When a mark is strong and well-recognized, as in the case of Joel Gott Wines, LLC v. Rehoboth Von Gott. Inc., any similar mark appearing on related goods like non-alcoholic beverages can create a perception that the products are somehow affiliated, even if they are not. This is especially true for products like alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages that may be consumed in similar social settings or could be perceived as extensions of one another in a brand’s product line. The courts and the TTAB, therefore, consider not just the textual similarity of the trademarks but also how these products are typically sold, marketed, and consumed to determine if there is a likelihood of confusion, thereby safeguarding both brand identity and consumer interests.

Contact Our Trademark Attorneys