“Captain Iglo” is probably Iglo GmbH’s best-known advertising figure. But other manufacturers also advertise with images of older men with beards in front of coastal scenes. Appel Feinkost GmbH & Co KG is one of them. In Iglo’s view, this advertising was too similar and would therefore mislead customers. However, the Munich I Regional Court has now denied such an unfair deception about the commercial origin (Section 4 No. 3 lit. a UWG). In principle, motifs such as the sea, the coast and similar are in need of protection and could therefore not be protected against imitation. There is also a big enough difference between the two advertising figures themselves. Consumers would not recognize “Captain Iglo” here, but merely a “distinguished, well-off gentleman in an elegant three-piece suit with a silk scarf” and an Elbe pilot’s cap. However, advertising with “best agers” is also common practice and not eligible for protection. The judgment is not yet final (Munich Regional Court I, judgment of December 3, 2020, Ref.: 17 HK O 5744/20).
Inadmissible media disruption: advertising letter may not refer to general terms and conditions on the Internet
Inadmissible media disruption: advertising letters may not refer to general terms and conditions on the Internet – important decision by the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court.