Reading Time: 2 minutes

In a moment that surely rattled diamond-encrusted glove compartments everywhere, Mercedes-Benz has been told—in the most European legal way possible—that its beloved G-Wagon is simply not that special.

The European Union General Court has rejected Mercedes’ attempt to trademark a stylized image of the G-Wagon climbing a hill, because—and we quote—it “merely represents a typical off-road vehicle in a common driving situation.”

Ouch.

So, what exactly did Mercedes try to trademark? A minimalist drawing of the G-Wagon, proudly ascending a slope, like a very rich mountain goat. The image, they argued, was distinctive. Iconic, even. The court, however, looked at it and went, “Hmm. This could be a Jeep.”

And honestly… fair.

Let’s be real here: take away the badge, the matte army paint, and the faint scent of overpriced cologne, and what are you left with? A very boxy vehicle climbing a hill. Which is, you know, literally what off-road vehicles are supposed to do. That’s like Rolex trying to trademark the concept of “time passing,” or Dyson trademarking “suction.”

The EUIPO, followed by the General Court, found the sketch not distinctive enough to function as a trademark. In other words, Mercedes’ drawing was about as unique as an inspirational quote on a yoga mat.

But Mercedes persisted. They argued that the line art was sufficiently abstract, stylized, and evocative. The court, unmoved, essentially replied: “That’s cute. Still looks like every kid’s drawing of a boxy car on a hill.” Which is arguably more of a burn than if they’d just said it looked like a Jeep. (Actually, they might have implied that, too.)

Let’s take a moment to reflect: the G-Wagon is the vehicular equivalent of wearing hiking boots to brunch—it can climb mountains, but more often, it’s just climbing parking garage ramps in Monaco. It’s the status symbol for when you want people to think you camp, but only if there’s valet.

And now? No trademarked mountain moment for you, Mercedes.

Perhaps the next attempt will feature the G-Wagon doing something truly distinctive—like blocking a bike lane, idling outside a pilates studio, or navigating an artisanal grocery store parking lot while blasting obscure EDM. Surely that image would stand out.

Until then, the G-Wagon remains what it always was: expensive, boxy, and—as it turns out—legally generic when drawn driving uphill.

Author(s)

This content is not intended to provide legal advice or opinion as neither can be given without reference to specific events and situations. © 2021 Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP.

Have Questions?

Enjoy this article?
Don’t forget to share.

Related Posts

Intellectual Property Law
Blog
Reading time: 4 mins
In today’s hyper-saturated marketplace, standing out is everything. You’ve perfected your product’s look—sleek, smart, maybe even sexy. But while you’re[...]
Intellectual Property Law
Blog
Reading time: 3 mins
As a trademark agent, I have seen some colourful branding disputes. The most recent – a showdown between Buc-ee’s—the Texas-based[...]
Intellectual Property Law
Blog
Reading time: 3 mins
In a gloriously chaotic trademark case, Lady Gaga is being sued for $100 million over the word Mayhem. Not by[...]