Entain Loses Trademark Battle in EU Copyright Clash

Entain has come up short in its efforts to safeguard its Sportingbet brand. A ruling by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) dismissed the gambling giant’s opposition to an EU trademark application from Italian operator Sportbet S.R.L. This decision coincides with the ongoing legal wrangling in the global gambling sector as companies fight to consolidate their positions in an increasingly saturated market.

Entain Argued That the Two Names Were Too Similar

This case concerns a logo mark application by Sportbet covering gambling, gaming, and entertainment services. Entertain contended that Sportbet’s name and branding infringed on the Sportingbet trademarks. According to the gambling giant, the two names were too similar and risked confusing consumers since both companies operate in the same industry.

Despite Entain’s best efforts to make its case, the EUIPO had a different stance. The authority’s ruling stated that  “sport” and “bet” were generic terms within the sportsbook sector. Therefore, these words cannot be the basis for an exclusive claim. The EUIPO remarked that such descriptive terms lack the distinctiveness to prevent widespread use in branding.

While both brands operate roughly within the same jurisdictions and offer similar services, EUIPO was adamant that the visual and phonetic differences were enough to prevent customer confusion. The authority noted that neither of the marks included distinctive or proprietary elements that would grant one party broader protection against the other.

The EUIPO Sided Firmly with Sportingbet

While Entain highlighted Sportingbet’s presence in markets like Germany, Malta, Greece, Portugal, and Bulgaria, it was unable to convince the regulator that Sportingbet enjoyed EU-wide recognition that would make its trademark problematic. The EUIPO further noted that some of Entain’s supporting documents were from the United Kingdom, making them irrelevant to EU copyright disputes.

Entain also attempted to argue its case based on unregistered rights and acquired distinctiveness. However, these also fell on deaf ears. EUIPO found much of the company’s evidence to be self-generated, promotional in tone, or not independently verifiable, further undermining its case. In a final blow, the regulator dismissed the opposition in full and ordered Entain to pay Sportbet €300 ($352) in legal costs.

This decision continues the trend of intensifying copyright disputes in the gambling space. Last month, the Supreme Court of Georgia ruled in favor of Aviator LLC in its IP dispute with SPRIBE, upholding Aviator’s exclusive rights to the “Aviator” game name and airplane logo. These cases underline the ongoing challenge of defending legacy brands in numerous jurisdictions where the expanding gambling market puts pressure on companies to protect their IP via all means available.