Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court: "Püppi" costume does not breach the Pippi Longstocking trademark

On 6 October 2015, Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court decided that a Pippi Longstocking costume on sale under the “Püppi” label is not a breach of the wordmark “Pippi”. There is no risk of confusion between the terms because the high degree of similarity in terms of sound and typeface is neutralised by differences in the semantic content, the court said (case no.: I-20 U 210/14).

The legal successor of Astrid Lindgren owns the European Union wordmark “Pippi” registered for clothing, footwear, headgear, T-shirts and caps in class 25. In 2012, a discount supermarket sold a carnival costume labelled “Püppi”, which looked similar to the well-known fictional character Pippi Longstocking. The legal successor filed a claim against the discounter for an injunction and damages. She considered that even the use of the word “Püppi” was a trademark infringement regardless of how the costume was designed.

As we reported, in two recent decisions the Federal Court of Justice in Germany ruled that a Pippi Longstocking-style carnival costume did not breach copyright law (cf. Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 17 July 2013, case no. I ZR 52/12) or competition law (cf. Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 19 November 2015, case no. I ZR 149/14). In the present case the subject of dispute was limited to claims under trademark law.

The previous instance ruled in favour of the discounter, reasoning that the “Pippi” trademark had not been used in such a way as to preserve the rights attached to it. Usage of the trademark for aprons and stockings based on the fictional character was descriptive and thus did not constitute a use as a trademark, the court said.

Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court dismissed the appeal for other reasons. The court explained that while there was a high degree of similarity in terms of sound and typeface between the trademarks, this was neutralised by semantic differences. According to the court, “Pippi” is known as an abbreviation of “Pippi Longstocking”, while “Püppi” is understood as a designation of a little doll (German: Püppchen) or as a cute name for girls. On these grounds, the lack of use to preserve the rights attached to it was not significant to the decision.

The decision by Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court fits in with the previous Pippi Longstocking rulings by the Federal Court of Justice and shows once again how valuable product protection under trademark and design law can be for literary “fantasy figures” in order to successfully take action against copycats.