7 Aug 2018
SEA WORLD LLC v SEA WORLD MANAGEMENT PTY LTD [2018] NZHC 1995
- Citation
- [2018] NZHC 1995
- Court
- High Court
The Assistant Commissioner erred by treating Sea World US reputation as confined to stylised logos and by overstating that stylistic differences avoided confusion; market awareness of the words 'SEA WORLD' engaged s16. However, given clear geographic separation of services (United States v Commonwealth of Australia) and the way consumers plan travel, no material s16 confusion arises when full circumstances are considered; both parties’ marks are registrable provided specifications are geographically limited to their respective jurisdictions.