SANRIO STOCK INDEX · SSI
8136¥1,084 2.52%2618NT$43.70 0.46%MNSO$11.72 3.78%MAT$13.34 2.91%BBW$31.50 3.08%MCD$280.63 4.16%CROX$125.28 0.89%1929HK$11.55 4.43%0116HK$10.23 3.75%7230RM1.78 1.14%TPR$144.21 0.15%
Hello Kitty Lawsuit TrackerUnofficial Sanrio Legal Archive
Case fileReal

Sanrio Co., Ltd. v. Bifulco Distribuzione (HAPPY ANGELS)

A rare Sanrio loss: its copyright-based attack on a “HAPPY ANGELS” mark failed because it could not prove it owned a protectable copyright in the stylised cat face.

Sanrio Co., Ltd. (invalidity applicant),
Plaintiff,
v.
Bifulco Distribuzione (registrant),
Defendant.
Docket No.Cancellation ICD 4404 C; appeal R 1925/2011-4
CourtEUIPO Cancellation Division; Fourth Board of Appeal
Filed2010
StatusDecided

The record

Court
EUIPO Cancellation Division; Fourth Board of Appeal
Jurisdiction
European Union
Docket No.
Cancellation ICD 4404 C; appeal R 1925/2011-4
Filed
2010
Resolved
2012
Sanrio’s role
Petitioner
Type
Trademark
Claims
Invalidity under Art. 53(2)(c) CTMR — earlier German copyright in the Hello Kitty character
Counsel — plaintiff/petitioner
Boehmert & Boehmert
Counsel — Sanrio side
not public

What happened

A rare Sanrio loss: its copyright-based attack on a “HAPPY ANGELS” mark failed because it could not prove it owned a protectable copyright in the stylised cat face.

Outcome

Request rejected; appeal dismissed (16 May 2012). Sanrio could not prove authorship/ownership or that a “highly stylised cat face” is a protected work; ordered to pay EUR 1,000.

The legal nuance

The mirror image of Sanrio’s China wins, where copyright in the character usually carries the day. In the EU here, it could not clear the authorship bar.

Back to the archive