Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc. v. Sid Shaw Elvisly Yours
England and Wales Court of Appeal
[1999] R.P.C. 567 (1999)
- Written by Meredith Hamilton Alley, JD
Facts
Elvis Presley was a world-famous singer, performer, and actor who died in 1977. Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc. (EPEI) (plaintiff) was Presley’s successor in interest. Sid Shaw (defendant) had a company in the United Kingdom, Elvisly Yours, that began marketing and selling Elvis-related products around the world in 1980. In 1986 Shaw began selling Presley-branded toiletries, which Shaw’s customers bought because of their association with Presley, not because of any quality inherent to the toiletries. In 1987, Shaw applied for a trademark for the name Elvisly Yours, written in an elaborate cursive font. The E in Shaw’s trademark resembled the distinctive E in the first letter of Presley’s signature, which was also written in cursive. In 1989, EPEI filed three trademark applications with the Intellectual Property Office in the United Kingdom relating to toiletries to be sold using (1) Presley’s signature, (2) the name Elvis, and (3) the name Elvis Presley. The three applications passed the first stage of examination, and then Shaw filed notices of opposition. A hearing officer found for EPEI in the hearing on Shaw’s opposition. Shaw appealed to the High Court of Justice, which found for Shaw on the grounds that EPEI’s marks were not sufficiently distinctive to merit registration. EPEI appealed the denial of its application for registration of trademark of Presley’s signature to be used to sell toiletries, among other issues, to the England and Wales Court of Appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Walker, J.)
Concurrence (Brown, J.)
Concurrence (Morritt, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.