7
Nov/13

MAXIM v MAXIM


Maxim started as a men’s magazine and has become a ‘lifestyle’ brand. Defendant used MAXIM for anti-perspirant wipes for people with hyperhidrosis, a condition causing excessive sweating. Four years ago, defendant began selling scented wipes, and adopted a logo and packaging that, allegedly, is evocative of Maxim’s image. Maxim itself is moving into fragrance and cosmetic, and in the course of surveying the market, learned of defendant’s packaging. It brought a prelim.

Held: Under the heightened Salinger standard, Maxim failed to shop irreparable harm, or more, precisely, if there was irreparable harm, it occurred four years ago. Also, defendant’s target market, people who sweat a lot, was very small.

maxim v corad

One Response to “MAXIM v MAXIM”

  1. dtobias says:

    This looks like another example of products starting out in widely divergent categories, and able to coexist (like Apple Records and Apple Computer in their earlier days) but eventually converging to where some of their products are closer together and possibly subject to confusion (as happened when Apple’s computers got more musically capable, and later when they started the iTunes store).