LoginSubscribe Now
International In-house Counsel Journal Logo
International In-house Counsel Journal Logo
  • Home
  • Business Sectors
  • Areas of Law
  • Editorial Board
  • Write a Paper
  • Subscribe
  • Books
  • Reports
  • Back Issues
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • PLS LogoCopyright & permissions
© 2026 International In-house Counsel Journal Ltd. | ISSN 1754-0607 | Picture Credits: Freepix, Unsplash and by permission of the authors
Back to library search

Battle for a Reputed Brand, Legitimate Competition or Free-Riding?

May 2013CompetitionAgriculture

Abstract

This article is a case study of a long-running trademark dispute between the two leading dairy companies in Finland, focusing on the protection of a trademark with a reputation. Initially, Valio Oy (Valio) alleged that Arla Ingman Oy Ab (Arla Ingman) had committed trademark infringement of Valio’s well-known trademarks VOIMARIINI®, OIVARIINI® and MARIINI® through Arla Ingman’s use of the trademark INGMARIINI for identical spreadable fat products. In addition to the proceeding in the district court, Valio opposed Arla Ingman’s trademark application INGMARIINI in the Finnish National Board of Patents and Registration. Both of these proceedings led, through appeal, to final rulings by the Finnish Supreme Court (KKO 2010:12) and the Supreme Administrative Court (KHO 421/2/09). The Supreme Court held that Valio’s trademarks VOIMARIINI® and OIVARIINI® are trademarks with a reputation in Finland. However, INGMARIINI was not deemed to be confusingly similar to Valio’s trademarks and the use of INGMARIINI was not regarded to take unfair advantage of Valio’s reputed trademarks. A year later, the Supreme Administrative Court took the opposite view and held that even though the trademarks were not confusingly similar as such, INGMARIINI did benefit from the reputation of the earlier VOIMARIINI® trademark, with the result that the INGMARIINI trademark did not fulfil the registration requirements of the Finnish Trademark Act. The effects of the different rulings of the two high courts are evident as INGMARIINI is not allowed to be registered as a trademark and yet Valio may not prevent Arla Ingman from using the INGMARIINI name to distinguish its products. The rulings did not only spark off debate among Finnish academics and trademark lawyers but also justified the need for a special IP court that is planned to be established in Finland in the near future.

Subscribe to reador
PLS Logo Copyright & permissions

Author

Teresa Laimio

Senior Legal Counsel, Valio, Finland

Related Papers

Ecosystem Collapse, Food Insecurity and the United Kingdom: Integrating National Security and Long-term Food System Reform
While the United Kingdom (UK) has had an integrated food market since the mid-19th century, food is not a reserved matter following devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. As...Read more
Portrait image of Simon Boyle
Simon Boyle
Environmental Law Director, Landmark Information Group, UK
Portrait image of Daniel Scrase
Daniel Scrase
Trainee Solicitor, Agri Advisor Legal LLP, UK
Portrait image of Lucy Crabtree
Lucy Crabtree
Paralegal, Thompsons Solicitors LLP, UK
Portrait image of Sir Crispin Agnew KC
Sir Crispin Agnew KC
Honorary Research Fellow, University of Dundee, UK
Antitrust Compliance in the Age of the New Whistleblower Incentive Program
Antitrust compliance has been, and should continue to be, near the top of any company’s global compliance program checklist. With the potentially massive private civil awards in the United States...
Read more
Portrait image of Mark McCareins
Mark McCareins
General Counsel, Metals Service Center Institute, USA
Borderless AI, Fragmented Regulations Navigating New Legal Frontier
AI is no longer a futuristic idea, the promise of tomorrow; it is woven into the fabric of contemporary business, revolutionizing how organizations operate, compete and succeed. AI has moved...Read more
Portrait image of Vijayalakshmi Natarajan
Vijayalakshmi Natarajan
VP, Associate General Counsel |Board Director, Harman (Samsung), India
State Monopolies: A Look Back, and the Road Ahead
Introducing the proposed amendment to Article 19(6) of the Constitution of India, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in reference to the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of Motilal...Read more
Portrait image of Surup Ray Chaudhuri
Surup Ray Chaudhuri
Counsel, United Breweries Limited, India