Red Bull Energy Drink 250 ml x 24

Product Information

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. The Guangdong High Court referred the case to the SPC, proposing that the Guangzhou Intermediate Court hear the two cases together. This ensures that behaviour in subsequent visits to the same site will be attributed to the same user ID.

The SPC echoed the Guangdong High Court's view that the main reason for this dispute was that the trademark licence did not foresee the situation at the end of the agreement and did not clarify which party would own the rights of the packaging design that had been created and used during the term of the agreement. Now, both companies, GPH and JDB, were using their own trademark, WANG LAO JI and JIA BU DUO, respectively, but on the same red can container (Figure 4). Therefore, should the relationship between the Chinese party and the foreign party come to an end for any reason, the Chinese party may continue using its own name. Also, just so you know, the founders are among the top two richest persons of their respective countries.The red can only became a source indicator after long-term use and could only indicate the trademark WANG LAO JI as the source. Just like with Instagram Reels, Red Bull quickly started integrating YouTube Shorts into its short-video content plan quickly after the feature's launch.

Red Bull's social media strategy is inspired by and in sync with the brand's motto - "Red Bull gives you wings". In such cases, at the end of the licence agreement, the licensee may continue to use its own trademark, which has benefited from the promotion during the life of the agreement. Google Analytics, Hotjar and Leadfeeder also helps our marketing colleagues to work out the effectiveness of our digital marketing campaigns.The Red Bull case confirms the principle that the goodwill attached to a trademark cannot be separated from the trademark right, and that, at the end of a licence, no compensation is due to the licensee.

PS: To see what’s the average engagement rate on TikTok for different industries, check out our social media industry benchmarks study! the trademark" and "[t]he trademark is part of the assets of the company") did not mean that the ownership of the trademark was transferred. Hung To used the trademark WANG LAO JI together with a different packaging (the "red can") (Figure 3), for which it obtained a design patent in 1997. This argument was, of course, groundless, but precise wording in the joint venture agreement would have avoided the litigation altogether.This may arise in situations where the licensee has a stronger position in the negotiations with the trademark owner. See, Red Bull's niche target market is the youth, and the youth wants mystery and vigour in all endeavours. The red can design was not, from the outset, an independent "source indicator" of the origin of the products in the same way as the names "Dongfeng" and "Huachen" are. The Delhi High Court dismissed Red Bull’s application by relying primarily on the ingredients that constitute a successful injunction stating that Red Bull had failed to establish prima facie case in its favour, that both taglines were descriptive and laudatory in nature and that the balance of convenience was in favour of Pepsi as their products were already being sold for almost five years prior to the filing of the plaintiff’s case.

the trademark" or "[t]he trademark is part of the assets of the company", to describe its investment in the joint venture, Tencel opened the door for the joint venture to argue that the ownership of the trademark had, in fact, been transferred. Red Bull, a leading brand globally for energy drinks, led their case in the High Court with the contention that the adoption of the impugned tagline by PepsiCo was malafide and intended to benefit from the goodwill and popularity of Redbull’s registered mark. It was also contended that Red Bull’s plaint itself acknowledged that the aforesaid tagline was being used by the plaintiff in a descriptive manner. 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.

The case was complicated by the fact that the trademark licence was signed in the context of a joint venture agreement. What is fascinating about Red Bull's video marketing strategy is that although the main video concept remains the same for all platforms used, the brand's content is unique on all three channels.