Aldi’s newly released, discounted beauty products have been accused of “potentially infringing” major labels including Benefit, Nars, and Charlotte Tilbury.
The supermarket chain has recently unveiled its latest low-price Lacura cosmetics line, leading many observers, beauty shoppers and intellectual property experts to suggest they could be copycats of more established brands.
Aldi’s new, own-branded products, which include blush, bronzer, mascara and primer, have sparked controversy due to the similarities their distinctive design and packaging share with several well-known cosmetic labels, including Smashbox, Nars, and Benefit.
The difference in price between Aldi’s discounted cosmetic products and the major brand versions is significant, in one instance it is as much as £42. Aldi’s Broadway Shape and Glow bronzer, which has been likened to Charlotte Tilbury’s Filmstar Bronze and Glow, is selling for just £6.99 while the established brand is priced at £49. This has led many experts to speculate about the damaging effect of alleged copycat products on branded goods.
This isn’t the first time the German retailer has been accused of potentially infringing the intellectual property rights of established brands. Earlier this year sausage brand Heck and yoghurt maker The Collective also accused Aldi of copying their brands, a claim which the supermarket chain has denied.
But when it comes to own-brand “copycat” products, Jason Aghatise, our Chartered Trade Mark Attorney, said they could be extremely damaging to brands and their reputations.
Mr Aghatise said: “Consumers and industry experts alike have long speculated that big brands, such as Aldi, may have infringed their intellectual property rights by creating own-brand versions, which bear a striking resemblance to well-known products on the market.
“Put simply, an own-brand copycat product imitates the design of a leading brand to free ride on the latter's reputation. The issue of own-brand copycats allegedly infringing larger brand’s rights isn’t new. We see accusations of own-brand infringement frequently, which is why the industry will be keenly observing the unfolding legal action threatened by Heck as it could set a precedent for future cases.
“While many shoppers and bargain hunters may believe purchasing discounted brands to be harmless, and may even take advantage of the lower pricing, we believe that this could be extremely damaging to cosmetic companies which have invested significant funds, time and effort into creating, marketing, and launching successful products.
“A cheaper and potentially inferior version could not only damage the brand’s reputation, if it is poorly made, it could also drive sales away from established labels and place their longevity in jeopardy.”
Aldi has refuted claims that its own-brand products are copycats and has denied accusations of infringement.
Image source: www.shevolutionuk.com
Patent Emergency! What to do when you’ve (accidentally) disclosed your invention before you’ve filed a patent application
One of the cornerstones of the patent system in many countries, including the UK, is the need to apply for a patent before disclosing your invention publicly. This is because such ‘self-disclosure’ can be used to invalidate a subsequently filed patent application. That’s a horrible situation, because you may have really shot yourself in the foot in terms of getting patent protection in the UK and in many other countries. Therefore, we firmly advise that you keep the invention secret before filing a patent application on the invention.
IP expert praises one million women in STEM roles to mark International Day of Women and Girls in Science
A leading intellectual property expert has said it is “incredibly encouraging” to see almost one million women in STEM roles for the first time, but called for continued action to support this upwards trend.
Small Irish business wins ’David and Goliath’ trade mark case against McDonalds
An Irish fast-food company has claimed a famous victory over one of the biggest brands in the world. Supermac, a beloved restaurant chain throughout Ireland and Northern Ireland, has successfully challenged McDonalds over its trade mark for ‘Big Mac’ in the European Union.
EPO Board of Appeal finds that plants *ARE* patentable at the EPO - Rule 28(2) EPC is unenforceable
We have previously reported on the introduction of new Rule 28(2) EPC regarding the patentability of plants and animals obtained by “an essentially biological process”. As detailed in our November 2018 article, the first case to go to appeal was scheduled to take place on 5 December 2018. That hearing has now taken place and a decision has issued.
Mental health in intellectual property – breaking down barriers
Mental illness is frequently referred to as the ‘last taboo'.
First case to go to appeal at EPO since new Rule 28(2) EPC was implemented
Last July we reported1 on the introduction of new Rule 28(2) EPC regarding the patentability of plants and animals obtained by “an essentially biological process”.
Following this, a case2 is now going to appeal at the EPO to contest the interpretation and validity of this new Rule. Significantly this will be the first case to go to the Boards of Appeal since Rule 28(2) EPC was implemented. Oral proceedings are scheduled to take place on 5th December 2018.3