Set by LinkedIn, used to store information about the time a sync with the lms_analytics cookie took place for users in the Designated Countries (which LinkedIn determines as European Union (EU), European Economic Area (EEA), and Switzerland). By the way, Red Bull wasn't the only brand that was dragged to the court in such a false advertisement case. New Balance was similarly sued in 2011 for falsely claiming that its toning shoes burnt calories, Dabur was sued in 2017 for the deceptive advertisement of its tal oil doing "dugni tezi se sharirik vikas", L'Oreal was sued in 2014 for misleading customers that its skincare products were "clinically proven" to cause "visibly younger skin in just 7 days", and there were many other such instances. In both cases, when the trademark licence agreement was terminated, the licensees argued that they should have the right to continue using the trademark, since they had contributed to the value of the business in China throughout the duration of the contract. The message to practitioners is ultimately the same as for the Red Bull case: carefully draft contract clauses to avoid litigation. Given that trademark ownership remains with the licensor at the end of a licence agreement, it is highly recommended to stipulate in the agreement whether the licensor and/or the licensee shall bear the cost of advertisements and promotion and which party will benefit from such promotion. This will prevent the licensee from requesting compensation and claiming that the trademark has gained value as a result of its own effort.

Judging by the number of views each of Red Bull's YouTube Shorts has recorded and by the brand's overall YouTube performance, integrating this type of content seems to have been a smart move. dunnhumby’s customer knowledge capabilities, science and tools, empowered Red Bull to become a partner to the retailer and make customer-centric assortment decisions. This data-driven approach also helped to increase the retailer’s commitment, who agreed to test the recommendations in several stores. Red Bull gives you wings." - did this ad slogan influence you to try out the drink? Yeah? That's awesome as long as you don't take it literally. And once you do, things can get seriously awkward. That's exactly what happened in the US when a person filed a suit against Red Bull for not giving him 'wings'! Sounds ridiculous? Ya, we know. But it's how it is. And what did Red Bull plan to achieve, you ask? See, Red Bull's niche target market is the youth, and the youth wants mystery and vigour in all endeavours. Therefore, in a bid to entice the youth, they came up with this brilliant ad. As intended, the plane took off and the result... Red Bull became the most consumed energy drink in the world.Both the Beijing High Court (on 25 November 2019) and the SPC on appeal (on 21 December 2020) rejected Red Bull China's arguments and claims. For Red Bull, the key strategy that turned the brand into the huge success it is today was breaking out of the norm with its marketing initiatives. @redbull only one way to get to the top of this 15m drop #redbull #givesyouwiiings #bike #bikelife #weird #elevator ♬ original sound - Red Bull Costco Online UK Limited, UK Home Office, Hartspring Lane, Watford, Hertfordshire, WD25 8JS. Registered in England and Wales No. 8055444 And like Bill Gates says, "Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning." This time, they realised and were cautioned. And thus, they changed their ad slogan to "Red Bull gives you wiiings." This was another clever shot, whereby this time, none could sue Red Bull because there won't be any dictionary meaning of 'wiiings' (with 3 i's), while it would still sound like 'wings'! A superb idea, indeed. A cookie set by YouTube to measure bandwidth that determines whether the user gets the new or old player interface.

Consequently, from 1998 onwards, the two companies, GPH and JDB, were producing the same product using the same trademark, WANG LAO JI, but were selling the tea in very different containers: the green container and the red can. Both the Guangdong High Court in the Wang Lao Ji case, and the Beijing High Court and the SPC in the Red Bull case, gave the same reasoning: the goodwill attached to the trademark, which may have considerably increased through the implementation of the licence agreement, cannot be separated from the ownership of the trademark. Therefore, once the licence is terminated, all the value remains with the trademark owner and no compensation is due. Other energy drink companies have also been the target of lawsuits: In 2012, a class action lawsuit was filed against Monster Beverage Corporation for engaging in deceptive advertising and marketing to children. (That case is still in progress, but many of its claims were dismissed in 2016.) Thanks to a clever marketing strategy, Red Bull became the leading brand in its industry and gained a tremendous community on all the major social media platforms.Furthermore, with regard to the assignment of a trademark contributing to the registered capital of a joint venture, an easily overlooked rule is that the assignor and the assignee (the joint venture company) must sign and file a joint application for approval of the transfer with the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA), and the trademark transfer is only complete when the CNIPA approves it. The signature of the assignment contract is insufficient. The brand creates dedicated content for each short-form video platform leveraged to reach multiple audiences The Court, whilst adjudging the matter, contemporaneously viewed the products and held that there was no similarity or likeness between the two products. It was further opined that the layout of the two cans were wholly different in terms of their colour schemes and fonts along with the brand names of the aforesaid products, “Red Bull” and “STING” being prominently displayed on the respective cans. Moreover, in comparison to the brand name of the defendant PepsiCo’s product, “STING”, which was displayed conspicuously on the cans, the impugned tagline only appeared in a small font. Therefore, it was apparent that no confusion or deception would be caused to the consumers of the respective products and consequently, no case of passing off could be made out. Benjamin Careathers got no chill! Yes, that's our man. He, joined by others later, filed a case against Red Bull in 2013. In 1998, Hung To set up a wholly owned subsidiary called Dongguan Jia Duo Bao Drink & Food Co, Ltd (JDB), which carried on the production and sale of the herbal tea using the red can.