apple Faces Trademark Infringement Lawsuit Over “Fitness+” Service
Apple is facing a lawsuit in France over its “Fitness+” subscription service. A French fitness company, Sport & Fitness Management (SFM), alleges that Apple’s use of “Fitness+” infringes on their existing “Fitness plus” trademark. The lawsuit, seeking €600,000 in damages, raises questions about trademark protection and potential consumer confusion in the increasingly crowded fitness market.
French Entrepreneur accuses Apple of Trademark Copying
Loïc Pajot, who heads Sport & Fitness Management (SFM), claims Apple copied the name of his fitness complex trademarked as “Fitness Plus.” SFM has been offering in-person and online fitness classes under the “Fitness Plus” brand since 2011.
Legal Action Filed After Cease and Desist Letters Ignored
Despite sending multiple cease and desist letters to Apple, Pajot says the tech giant did not respond adequately, leaving him with no alternative but to file a lawsuit in Paris. His lawyer, françois-Xavier Langlais, argued in court that Apple’s use of “Apple Fitness+”, “Fitness+”, and the Apple logo combined with ”Fitness+” constitutes trademark infringement.
Complex Trademark History Complicates the Case
Pajot initially opposed Apple’s trademark applications in 2021. However, his attempt to update his company logo in 2022 led to an unexpected hurdle: the original “fitness Plus” trademark had lapsed in December 2021, ten years after its registration. Despite this, Pajot’s legal team argues that Apple’s alleged infringement occurred prior to the trademark’s expiration, and thus remains actionable.
Apple Defends “Fitness+” Brand,Claims No Risk of Confusion
Apple contends that the lawsuit is without merit. Their legal portrayal argues that the term “Fitness” is widely used, and Apple commonly associates its brand with generic terms, such as “Apple Music” and “Apple Store”. Apple’s legal team further stated the company did not oppose the entrepreneur’s new logo in 2022 because the mark was not distinctive and of no interest.
Apple Seeks nullification of “Fitness Plus” Trademark
Apple is now challenging the validity of the “Fitness Plus” trademark, arguing that the term “Fitness” was already in common use when SFM registered its mark in 2011, and that the term “Plus” is merely a descriptive term suggesting superior quality.Apple highlights its brand recognition and the requirements of owning an Apple device and subscription to access Apple Fitness+.
Decision Pending in Trademark Dispute
Pajot is seeking €600,000 in damages for trademark infringement and unfair competition, and also an injunction to stop Apple from using the “Fitness+” name. The court’s decision in this case is expected in the coming months. Apple has so far declined to comment.
Based on the article, here are two PAA (People Also Ask) related questions:
apple Faces Trademark Infringement Lawsuit Over “Fitness+” Service
Apple is facing a lawsuit in France over its “Fitness+” subscription service. A French fitness company, Sport & Fitness Management (SFM), alleges that Apple’s use of “Fitness+” infringes on their existing “Fitness plus” trademark. The lawsuit,seeking €600,000 in damages, raises questions about trademark protection and potential consumer confusion in the increasingly crowded fitness market.
French Entrepreneur accuses Apple of Trademark Copying
Loïc Pajot, who heads Sport & Fitness Management (SFM), claims Apple copied the name of his fitness complex trademarked as “Fitness Plus.” SFM has been offering in-person and online fitness classes under the “Fitness Plus” brand as 2011.
Legal Action Filed After Cease and Desist Letters Ignored
Despite sending multiple cease and desist letters to Apple, Pajot says the tech giant did not respond adequately, leaving him wiht no choice but to file a lawsuit in Paris. His lawyer,françois-Xavier Langlais,argued in court that Apple’s use of “Apple Fitness+”,”Fitness+”,and the Apple logo combined with ”Fitness+” constitutes trademark infringement.
Complex Trademark History Complicates the Case
Pajot initially opposed apple’s trademark applications in 2021. However, his attempt to update his company logo in 2022 led to an unexpected hurdle: the original “fitness Plus” trademark had lapsed in December 2021, ten years after its registration. Despite this, Pajot’s legal team argues that Apple’s alleged infringement occured prior to the trademark’s expiration, and thus remains actionable.
Apple Defends ”Fitness+” Brand,Claims No Risk of Confusion
Apple contends that the lawsuit is without merit. Their legal portrayal argues that the term ”Fitness” is widely used, and Apple commonly associates its brand with generic terms, such as “Apple Music” and ”Apple Store”. apple’s legal team further stated the company did not oppose the entrepreneur’s new logo in 2022 as the mark was not distinctive and of no interest.
Apple Seeks nullification of ”Fitness Plus” Trademark
Apple is now challenging the validity of the “Fitness plus” trademark, arguing that the term “fitness” was already in common use when SFM registered its mark in 2011, and that the term “Plus” is merely a descriptive term suggesting superior quality.Apple highlights its brand recognition and the requirements of owning an Apple device and subscription to access Apple Fitness+.
Decision Pending in Trademark Dispute
Pajot is seeking €600,000 in damages for trademark infringement and unfair competition, and also an injunction to stop Apple from using the “Fitness+” name. The court’s decision in this case is expected in the coming months. Apple has so far declined to comment.
Q&A: Unpacking the Apple fitness+ Trademark Lawsuit
Q: What exactly is the lawsuit about?
A: The lawsuit, filed in France, centers on a trademark infringement claim. A French fitness company,Sport & Fitness Management (SFM),alleges that Apple’s “Fitness+” service violates their existing ”Fitness Plus” trademark. Thay claim apple copied their brand name.
Q: Who is suing apple,and what are they asking for?
A: Loïc Pajot,the head of SFM,is suing Apple. He’s seeking €600,000 in damages, plus an injunction to stop Apple from using the ”Fitness+” name.
Q: what’s Apple’s defense?
A: Apple argues the lawsuit is without merit, claiming the term “Fitness” is generic and widely used. They also assert that the term “Plus” is descriptive. They also highlight the brand recognition of the Apple brand.
Q: What’s the significance of the lapsed trademark?
A: SFM’s original “Fitness Plus” trademark lapsed in December 2021. Though, SFM’s legal team argues that the infringement occurred before the trademark expired, making it still actionable. This is a key point of contention.
Q: What’s next in this case?
A: The court is expected to make a decision in the coming months.The outcome will determine whether Apple can continue using the “Fitness+” name in France and whether SFM will receive damages.
Q: Could this impact Apple Fitness+ globally?
A: While the lawsuit is in France, a ruling against Apple could influence how they market “Fitness+” in other countries. It could also set a precedent for similar trademark disputes in the future.
