Brand Management: YS Garments LLC vs Next Retail PLC

This report delves into the legal dimensions of brand management, specifically examining a case study involving YS Garments LLC versus Next Retail PLC. The core issue revolves around trademark infringement, with YS Garments LLC's use of the "NEXT LEVEL" logo potentially causing confusion with Next Retail PLC's established brand. The report outlines the definition and significance of trademarks, detailing the process of registration under the Trade Mark Act, including the role of the UK Intellectual Property Office and the classification of goods and services. It explores trademark infringement, outlining the steps involved and the actions companies can take to mitigate confusion and protect their brands, such as strengthening their trademarks, differentiating products, and leveraging marketing strategies. The report also references a relevant case study involving Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co., to further illustrate the complexities of brand management and trademark disputes. The analysis underscores the importance of brand protection and the legal framework governing trademarks.

LEGAL ASPECTS OF BRAND
MANAGEMENT

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
ISSUE..............................................................................................................................................3
RULES.............................................................................................................................................3
APPLICATION...............................................................................................................................8
CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................10
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................12

INTRODUCTION
Branding reflects the overall integrity of the company and most of the companies set up
their individual department to manage and control the issues in right manner. The issues which is
raised in brand management is related to patent the company design or trade mark of the business
logo to secure the company from other company in relation to dealing in similar goods or
services (Klimenko and Klimenko, 2015). Thus, present report is based upon the YS Garments
LLC V Next Retail PLC in which the issues are raised relating to carrying the name word NEXT.
As both the business are promoting their business through this name only and thus the issues is
raised regarding distracting each other customer towards their own brand name.
ISSUE
In the present case scenerio, the issue is undertaken regarding using the same logo. As in
respect of YS Garments LLC who filed the application in court regarding the logo as 'NEXT
LEVEL' which they selected to emerge the business in global market. As they are dealing in
products related to clothing, footwear and also headgear accessories which is similar to the Next
retail PLC brand who is the opponent in this case study. Thus, in such case, the issues or
complaint is raised against YS Garments LLC regarding distracting customer towards their
business by using the same brand name. As customer are mistaken regarding the brand name
NEXT LEVEL and next and thus, they prefer the brands of the NEXT LEVEL. Thus, in such
case the issues are undertaken regarding violation of the norms which are mentioned under the
Trade Mark act.
RULES
Meaning:
Trade mark refers to any sign or logo which is adapted by company in respect of
representing the business in market. They mainly focus on choosing the innovative design to
differentiated other company business which are dealing in same type of business. As logo
reflect the company integrity in market and thus, the major focus of business is to adapt the
innovative concept to make the business criteria successful (Aureli and Forlani, 2016). Thus, in
such perspective, companies trade mark the logo to secure their property rights through filling
the application under the trade mark act. The right of the person is secured if their trade mark are
registered and also not affecting any person rights or integrity of the nations. Usually the trade

mark can be in the form of name, logo, sign, design or any type of symbol which differentiate
one company business from another company.
Registered trade mark:
The trade mark is registered under the trademark office and further application is to be
made under the trade mark official website. In case of UK, the application is to be made under
the UK intellectual Property office (UKIPO), as lot of companies applied for trade mark under
this office but after verifying all the essential requirement than only the application is accepted.
As it is the duty of the trade mark officer to verify that whether the trade mark is already exit or
not or such mark is not affecting any right of the person or country or not giving any rise to any
illegal activity (Dinnie, 2015). After cross verifying all the essential needs, the application is
accepted and also rights are given to the person regarding carrying the trade mark and promoting
the company in market. Once the application is given by the person and is accepted by the
officer, validity of the trade mark is for 10 years and after the validity is over, the holders had to
renew the mark to enjoy their rights. If the matters are related to unregistered trade mark, it is
valid if it is well off in china which in return carries lot of evidence to prove the property rights
which is not affecting any person right or also not infringing any person interest.
In relation to availing the right of the trade mark, it is necessary that the person carry
some official records regarding proving the rights of the trade mark and also enjoy the lawful
rights in respect of creating the innovative and unique concept (Blackett, 2016). The registration
of the trade mark services is provided by the State administration for industry and commerce
(SAIC).
Sections:
As it is examined that trade mark are registered in relation to differentiating the goods
and services in the form of classes. It is determined that under the trade mark act, more than 45
classes in which 34 classes are relating to goods and other 11 classes are mainly focusing on
services. It is also termed as nice classification under which goods are assigned as class 1 to 34
and they mainly deal in services relating to 35 to 45. As the class is important in respect of filling
the application under the trade mark act, as it helps in differentiating the set of goods and
services which is necessary in securing the rights in particular sections (Beritelli and Laesser,
2018). Thus, the major classes which are covered under the trade mark of goods act such as:

Class 18: The materials related to leather which can be made from animal skin or any type of
travel bags.
Class 24: Products related to textile materials such as bed cover or any type of table covers.
Class 25: The goods which are covered as clothing, footwear and headgear
As most of the companies mainly applied their trade mark under this class so that they
can differentiate their business from the other company business and also not promote the similar
products in market with same brand name (Perry, 2016).
Infringement:
This situation occurs in relation to facing any such violation of right by not taking care of
the trade mark or also some other person is using the trade mark by gaining their personal
benefits. Thus, this give rise to infringement of their rights which they carry by holding the trade
mark of property rights. This activity can be civil and criminal crime and also punishable under
by the courts in results in violation of any person right or harming such person integrity in larger
way. In respect of restricting such person from using the trade mark, attorney is to be send
regarding ceasing such mark and then draft the letter to the officer regarding stopping such
person who is using the trade mark (Papadopoulos, Hamzaoui-Essoussi and El Banna, 2016). As
it is examined that the person who had filed the application under the US, the laws and regulation
are to be applied from the perspective of US only but this rule is not applied under UK as the
trade mark is not applied in that country, but the flexibility is given to the company regarding
using the mark in UK. Thus, in such matter the case related to fraud or any type of infringement
is amended in this clause. The steps under which the infringement occurs is relating to:
 Defendant is using the trade mark in relation to confusing consumer through promoting
the same brand products.
 The infringement arises in relation to dealing the same products or also advertising the
same products in market through distracting the mind of the customer towards the
services which they are providing (Vogel and Watchravesringkan, 2017).
 Defendant is using the company mark for their own extra earning business or in
commerce business.
There are various aspects which cannot be considered to be the trademark if they are
registered and controlled by the controller general of patents, designs and trade mark (Cova and
Paranque, 2016). It can be related to quality, quantity, time of producing the goods or services or

any kind of the values which is maintained by the people in relation to building the relationship
with the society.
Actions to overcome:
In relation to undertaking most of the matter related to customer confusion, there are
various actions which is undertaken by the officer in respect of differentiating the company with
the other company products is relating to:
 Strength of the trade mark: As every company had strong motive to design the logo as
per their own needs. It mainly covers with the concept or ideas behind designing the
company logo or choosing the name which reflect the integrity in market (Ko, Costello
and Taylor, 2017). Thus, through this perspective, it can strength the name of the
company in market.
 Proximity of the goods: It carries the chances of similarity in the existing products
which are availed by the customer by taking in mind the similar products. Thus, it
results in affecting the right of the company by not promoting their own brand in right
manner (Bose, Roy and Tiwari, 2016). As in these aspects, the trade mark confused the
people regarding choosing the accurate products and thus the similarity of the products
or goods came into existence. Thus, in such manner the differentiation is to be
committed on the bases of the defining the strong concept behind choosing the name or
logo or sign of the company. Through this manner they came across the actual brand
and also prefer to choose the products for longer term gain.
 Similarity of the trademarks: In this perspective, the confusion is undertaken regarding
getting application for the similar trade mark, as it is more common that the company is
dealing in same products or services but if they are carrying the same mark, than it
brings confusion (Melewar and Skinner, 2018). Thus, in such aspects, it is the duty of
the trade mark officer to first inspect the reason behind applying the trade mark and then
accept their registration regarding providing such mark to promote the business.
 Evidence collected which reflect the actual confusion: When the business is carrying the
same trademark, it results in distracting the mind of the customer regarding choosing the
right brand, then in such manner the evidences is collected to differentiate the brands.
As evidence not reflect the actual integrity of the trademark but helps customer to select
the right brand.

 Marketing and promotion channels: Marketing is one of the most important aspects in
relation to reducing the effect of confusion. As mainly customer is attracted through
watching the promos or ads of the company in respect of promoting their own brand.
Thus, in such manner social media platform is important in reaching to large number of
customers (Baghi, Gabrielli and Grappi, 2016). As the confusion can be reduced in
relation to viewing the ads which is given by the company in innovative way through
differentiating their own brand in comparison with the other company brands.
 Expansion of products lines: These line is mainly used by company in relation to
differentiating the company products with new items. As line is introduced in respect of
promoting additional services in mix up with the existing products. This results in
getting addition discount from the customer regrading availing their products and also
can easily differentiate their products with the other company products (Bresciani and
Del Ponte, 2017). It helps companies to promote their products and also examining the
customer needs to retain their interest towards the services for longer way.
Thus, these are the major action which can be performed by the company in relation to
saving the trade mark from infringement (Green, Grace and Perkins, 2016). It also helps
companies in relation to differentiating their products from the other company products and
applying various strategies or cation to retain the interest of the customer towards the services for
longer way.
Relevant case study:
In context of trade mark, there are various cases which faces conflict in relation to
carrying the same logos, or design or colours on products or name similar with each other. Thus,
in respective of case study of the Apple Inc. V. Samsung Electronics Co. the issues are raised
regarding promoting the same design of the smartphones and computers tablets. Through this
manner they are distracting the mind of the customer regarding choosing the best products. Thus,
in such case, the complaint is filed by Samsung regarding carrying the same design of the smart
phone which they are using to build the customer base. As it is examined that apple company had
already sold many phones worldwide and also in conflict with the Motorola Mobility regarding
infringement of patent rights (Supreme court decides Samsung electronics Co. V Apple Inc,
2019). Thus, in such aspects the conflict further continues between the apple and Samsung

regarding article of manufacture producing the same design of the products similar to the apple
and Samsung company.
Another case which arises is relating to the same colour and the case is between the
Cadbury and nestle company. As Cadbury company filed the application regarding trade mark of
the purple colour which reflect the chocolate of the Cadbury company (The Color Purple: Nestlé
v Cadbury, 2019). But in such case nestle company opposed to this trade mark application
regarding saying that purple colour cannot be trade mark by the Cadbury company. As no
colours is specifically designed by the company in relation to carrying the trade mark rights. As
the reviews is shared by the nestle company regarding not carrying any such sign which reflect
the status of the Cadbury company or also no graphical representation is conducted through
which the Cadbury company can be easily differentiated. Thus, in this case the issues are raised
regarding getting protection of the same colour of the two or more companies.
APPLICATION
From the above case study, the judgement is reflected to the present case scenario which
is related to using the name of the work Next. As YS Garments LLC is using the name of the
NEXT LEVEL which they applied for the trade mark under the Trade mark and Patent act. As
under the trademark act, it is examined that company carrying the same name are not registered
under the trade mark office (Balmer and Chen, 2017). But if their name carries various
difference that their rights are protected and secured under the trademark act and also, they are
given liberty in relation to using such rights in better way. Thus, in such case the Next retail PLC
cannot impose any such restriction regarding carrying the same name to promote the business.
As both of the business are using the logo but in different manner as in case of YS garments,
they are using the logo in capital letters as NEXT LEVEL and in case of Next retail PLC they are
using the name as next which is in Small and running letters. In relation to undertaking the action
in respect of protecting the rights of the companies, the following actions are to be undertaken
such as:
Appropriate class: As the opponent cannot file the suit against the applicant in relation to
carrying the same name as the both of the business are also carrying or dealing in different
products. Before promoting the business in market, the person had to enrol the business into
following classes and then only the trade mark is registered. Thus, in such case the opponent i.e.
Next retail PLC is dealing the business under class 18, 24 and 25. YS garments are engaged in

business only related to clothing, footwear and headgear, they are not dealing in any textile
products or leather related to goods (Kasapi and Cela, 2017). Thus, in such manner they deal in
carrying different class of the goods which indicates that this is one of the actions which is
undertaken by the applicant in relation to applying the trade mark under the trade mark act.
Visually: It is reflected that the font which is used in relation to carrying the brand name is
different. As in relation to YS garments they are using the name as NEXT LEVEL which is
written in bold letters and also it carries the adequate space between the two. This reflects that
they carry certain meanings and also easily readable. But in relation to Next Retail PLC they are
carrying the work NEXT which not reflect any company specific meaning or also carry the
single word which cannot be infringed by any person (Sun, Paswan and Tieslau, 2016). In such
manner, the opposition in respect of using the same name is wrong as the style and font which is
used by both the companies are different. Thus, in such action, the opposition is not committed
in relation to filling application for registration of the business in respect of trade mark.
Phonetics: In these aspects, the opponent cannot stop the YS garment in respect of using the
name of the NEXT LEVEL. As the word pronouncing is different as there is lot of difference
between the work Next and NEXT LEVEL. As the word NEXT LEVEL carry the identical
meaning regarding the company brand which they are using to promoting the business but the
word Next which is used by the Next retail PLC not carry any specific identity regarding using
such brand name (Singh, 2016). Thus, in such perspective, next company cannot oppose to YS
garment regarding filling the trade mark and availing the rights.
Conceptually: If the companies are filling for trade mark it is necessary that the name carry some
concept and also it defines the meaning according to which the company is dealing the business.
As in relation to next retail PLC they are simply carrying the word Next which not indicates any
sign or the business which they are carrying is also not similar to that field. But in respect of YS
Garments they are using the word NEXT LEVEL which carries various meaning and also in
trends of fashion brand they are promoting the business through carrying the next stage products
or services (Duma and et.al., 2016). Thus, through this manner, it results in differentiating the
company name and logos from the other company and not raising chances to infringing any
company rights.
Similarity of goods and services: As both the companies are dealing in similar goods and also,
they registered themselves under the Class 25 which indicates the matters related to clothing,

footwears and headgear (Cooper, Miller and Merrilees, 2015). But in respect of undertaking the
business related to opponents, they also registered their business under the class 18, 24 and 25.
This indicates that the goods and services are similar but the business are more widely spread
and also deal in larger areas.
Thus, in such manner the application is resulting in showing that opponent cannot stops
the name of the use of the NEXT LEVEL to the applicant. As they carry various action which is
some kind of evidences, that is undertaken by applicant in respect of differentiating both
company brands and name (Mariutti and Tench, 2016). Next retail PLC carry the renowned
brand image in market and also dealing in high rated fashion industry. Thus, it indicates that
opponent cannot carry any such rights in relation to stopping YS garment regarding applying for
trademark.
CONCLUSION
From the above study, the report concludes that brand management is necessary in every
business and thus to gain longer term advantages, it is necessary that their brand name must be
different from the other company name. As in relation to trade mark act, it carries logos, design
and also the name of the brand which is carried by the company in relation to differentiating the
own company brand from the others. It helps company to retain their regular customer towards
the business and also attract the new customer through adapting various actions to retain their
interest towards the services.
In context of YS garments and Next retail PLC, the issues are raised regarding carrying
the name logo which is opposed by next retail regarding not getting registration for availing the
right of the trade mark. But from the above discussion, the matter clearly stated that it not result
to any infringement of nay rights or also not confusing customer regarding attracting them
through same logos. Thus, in such manner, it is clearly stated through visualizing or
conceptuality, the goods are registered under various class. Thus, in such manner the action is
necessary in relation to safeguarding the interest of the companies regarding protecting the rights
under the trade market act. Trade mark is valid for the period of the 10 years and in case of not
undertaking the matters relating to renewal of the trade mark than, it results in giving rights to
some other person to use such trade mark. As it is also undertaken when any person given rights
to any other person to allow them to use the trade mark than in such case it not results in
infringement of any such rights.

Thus, it results in gaining profits to the companies if their innovation and creative
thoughts are registered under the trade mark act. As the registration is not easily provided but it
is the duty of the trade mark officer to carry certain rights in respect of availing the services
which is mentioned under the trade mark act. Every county carries their different rules regarding
using the trade mark but it is necessary that it must be used in right direction and secure the right
of the company in better way.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals:
Aureli, S. and Forlani, F., 2016. The importance of brand architecture in business networks: The
case of tourist network contracts in Italy. Qualitative Market Research: An International
Journal. 19(2). pp.133-155.
Baghi, I., Gabrielli, V. and Grappi, S., 2016. Consumers’ awareness of luxury brand counterfeits
and their subsequent responses: when a threat becomes an opportunity for the genuine
brand. Journal of Product & Brand Management. 25(5). pp.452-464.
Balmer, J. M. and Chen, W., 2017. China’s brands, China’s brand development strategies and
corporate brand communications in China. In Advances in Chinese Brand Management.
(pp. 19-47). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Beritelli, P. and Laesser, C., 2018. Destination logo recognition and implications for intentional
destination branding by DMOs: A case for saving money. Journal of destination
marketing & management. 8. pp.1-13.
Blackett, T., 2016. Trademarks. Springer.
Bose, S., Roy, S. K. and Tiwari, A. K., 2016. Measuring customer-based place brand equity
(CBPBE): an investment attractiveness perspective. Journal of Strategic
Marketing. 24(7). pp.617-634.
Bresciani, S. and Del Ponte, P., 2017. New brand logo design: customers’ preference for brand
name and icon. Journal of Brand Management. 24(5). pp.375-390.
Cooper, H., Miller, D. and Merrilees, B., 2015. Restoring luxury corporate heritage brands: From
crisis to ascendency. Journal of Brand Management. 22(5). pp.448-466.
Cova, B. and Paranque, B., 2016. Value slippage in brand transformation: a
conceptualization. Journal of Product & Brand Management. 25(1). pp.3-10.
Dinnie, K., 2015. Nation branding: Concepts, issues, practice. Routledge.
Duma, F. and et.al., 2016. The management of luxury brand behaviour: Adapting luxury brand
management to the changing market forces of the 21st Century. The Marketing Review.
16(1). pp.3-25.
Green, A., Grace, D. and Perkins, H., 2016. City branding research and practice: An integrative
review. Journal of Brand Management. 23(3). pp.252-272.
Kasapi, I. and Cela, A., 2017. Destination branding: A review of the city branding
literature. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 8(4). pp.129-142.
Klimenko, O. I. and Klimenko, A. A., 2015. Role, functions and types of a brand as
individualization means of products and organizations. Mediterranean Journal of Social
Sciences. 6(2). p.251.
Ko, E., Costello, J. P. and Taylor, C. R., 2017. What is a luxury brand? A new definition and
review of the literature. Journal of Business Research.
Mariutti, F. and Tench, R., 2016. How does Brazil measure up? Comparing rankings through the
lenses of nation brand indexes. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy. 12(1). pp.17-31.