An online pet health supplies shop has received a legal letter from Hugo Boss over its name. Ben McDonald, from Bootle on Merseyside, set up Boss Pets in February, but this month received the letter from the designer brand demanding he stop using the word, which is widely used in the area to suggest something is great. Mr McDonald said his "whole world collapsed" after being told he faced the potential legal battle over concerns people might think the companies were linked. A spokeswoman for Hugo Boss said: "We are aware that the English word 'boss' is one that is commonly used." She added that "nevertheless, it's our responsibility to monitor and protect our brand rights globally and address unclear cases where needed". "When we became aware of the registration, we have approached the business owner as the intended registration represents an overlap with our trademarks. "As an international fashion company, we need to – like any other corporation – take measures to protect our existing trademark rights. These measures apply to both of our brands, BOSS and HUGO." She said the firm "only approaches third parties where an overlap with our existing trademark rights occurs, and as a matter of principle we always seek for a dialogue in favour of an amicable solution for both sides". Mr McDonald's own lawyers have argued that the firm, a pet health supplies business, was operating in an entirely different sector, using a commonly used term, and that there was no likelihood of confusion. Mr McDonald, who described himself as "just a lad from Bootle", said he had been given 10 days to take down his website or face legal action. He said he had spent "every spare penny" on his new website for his pet-related products. His lawyer Francis McEntegart said Mr McDonald did not have a case to answer and was accusing the clothes retailer of bullying his client. "My client is a small local business that is just starting out selling pet wellness products, it's not going to interfere with the profits of Hugo Boss in any way." Listen to the best ofBBC Radio Merseyside on Soundsand follow BBC Merseyside onFacebook,X, andInstagram. You can also send story ideas via Whatsapp to 0808 100 2230.
Hugo Boss wants Liverpool pet store to change name
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Hugo Boss Initiates Legal Action Against Local Pet Store Over Trademark Concerns"
Bbc News
7.6
TruthLens AI Summary
Ben McDonald, a resident of Bootle, Merseyside, has recently found himself at the center of a legal dispute with the renowned fashion brand Hugo Boss over the name of his newly established online pet health supplies store, Boss Pets. McDonald launched his business in February, but he received a legal letter from Hugo Boss demanding that he cease using the name, which the brand claims could cause confusion among consumers regarding a potential affiliation between the two companies. McDonald expressed his distress over the situation, stating that the threat of legal action made him feel as though his 'whole world collapsed.' He emphasized that the term 'boss' is commonly used in the local community to denote something impressive or of high quality, and he believes this usage should not infringe on Hugo Boss's trademark rights.
A spokesperson for Hugo Boss acknowledged the commonality of the word 'boss' in English but insisted on the company's responsibility to protect its brand rights globally. The representative explained that the company seeks to engage in dialogue with businesses that may potentially infringe upon their trademarks and aims for amicable resolutions. However, McDonald's legal counsel argued that the pet supply business operates in a completely different market from the fashion industry and that there is little to no risk of confusion among consumers. McDonald, who described himself as a small business owner with limited resources, expressed his frustration at the pressure to dismantle his website within ten days or face legal repercussions. His lawyer, Francis McEntegart, characterized Hugo Boss's actions as bullying, asserting that McDonald's business poses no threat to the profits of the international fashion label. The dispute highlights the complexities of trademark law, particularly for small businesses that might unintentionally come into conflict with larger corporate entities over common terms.
TruthLens AI Analysis
You need to be a member to generate the AI analysis for this article.
Log In to Generate AnalysisNot a member yet? Register for free.