Entain’s Sportingbet has lost trademark protection for most betting and gaming-related goods and services after the EUIPO partially declared itslogo invalid.
Entain’s Sportingbet brand has lost trademark protection for most betting and gaming-related goods and services after the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) partially declared its long-standing logo invalid.
In a decision dated yesterday (18 June), the office’s Cancellation Division ruled that the “sportingbet” mark, filed in 2003 and registered in 2005, was descriptive and lacked distinctive character for goods and services tied to betting and gambling.
The mark was struck down across large parts of six trademark classes covering electronic publications, communications, gambling related financial services, data transmission and gaming itself.
Speaking to NEXT.io, Entain highlighted the decision will not affect the company’s ability to use the brand for its products.
A spokesperson said: “This case concerns a specific EU trademark registration and not Entain’s ability to use the Sportingbet brand. The decision has no impact on Sportingbet’s operations, products or services, and Sportingbet remains fully available for use by Entain.
“Entain does not accept the conclusion that Sportingbet is descriptive or non-distinctive. The brand has operated in the market for many years and is recognised by consumers as identifying the commercial source of our services. The decision is not final and we expect to pursue an appeal.”
The challenge was brought by SB Entertainment, a Maltese company behind the rival Sportingwin brand, and forms part of a wider commercial dispute between the two operators.
NEXT.io understands SB Entertainment had been trying to get a settlement from Entain over the matter.
Entain partially loses ability to protect brand
The ruling leaves Sportingbet protected only for a narrow set of advertising, marketing, database and real estate services, while its core gambling uses lose their shield.
This means Entain’s ability to enforce a specific trademark on its brands might be hampered, potentially opening the door for similar designs from competitors in Europe.
Each side was ordered to bear its own costs, and the decision can still be appealed.
The Cancellation Division found that English-speaking consumers would read the sign as meaning a bet or gambling activity related to sports, and that its styling did too little to save it.
The Cancellation Division said: “The stylised elements are so negligible that they do not endow the trademark as a whole with any distinctive character.”
It added that the use of blue for “sporting” and red for “bet” only made the two words easier to read rather than functioning as a badge of origin.
The Cancellation Division added: “The graphic elements do not distract the consumer’s attention from the descriptive message conveyed.”
Sportingbet Limited, which is part of the Entain group, argued that the term was a coined and grammatically unusual one rather than a plain description.
It pointed to more than two decades of trading, a global portfolio of similar marks dating back to 2000 and high-profile sponsorships including Tottenham Hotspur and FC Steaua București.
The brand has operated since 1998 and was acquired by Entain in 2013, running sites and apps in multiple markets globally including in the UK, Brazil, Latam, Greece and Germany.
Entain said: “No English-speaking consumer would ever say they were placing a ‘sportingbet’ or even a ‘sporting bet’.”
The company also argued that the case was a spoiling tactic designed to frustrate its enforcement efforts, and that its rival had copied the Sportingbet branding.
The office noted that earlier registration attempts for the word “sportingbet” had repeatedly been refused, while stressing that it was not bound by any previous decisions.
The Cancellation Division concluded the logo kept its protection only where the services had no inherent link to gambling, such as real estate and general advertising.
The decision is open to appeal at the EUIPO Boards of Appeal.