National player Bastian Schweinsteiger achieved success on two occasions, not only in the Bundesliga but also in court.
1:0 - Nicknames enjoy name protection
Meat retailer may no longer use trademark "Schweini" - Registration of trademark "Schweini" inadmissible.
Following a ruling by the Munich I Regional Court, a meat product dealer is prohibited from using the designation 'Schweini' in commercial transactions without consent. Furthermore, the dealer must arrange for the deletion of the trademark he registered. The court thereby granted the corresponding claim brought by national football player Bastian Schweinsteiger.
In the first instance, the Munich I Regional Court, acting on a lawsuit filed by national football player Bastian Schweinsteiger, ordered a meat wholesaler to cease using the designation 'Schweini' in commercial transactions without authorization. Furthermore, the wholesaler is required to have the 'Schweini' trademark he registered deleted from the German Patent and Trademark Office. Ultimately, the court established that Schweinsteiger is entitled to a claim for damages resulting from the unauthorized use of his name. For the purpose of calculating these damages, the meat dealer must first disclose the extent to which he utilized the 'Schweini' designation and the revenues generated from it.
The defendant meat dealer had registered the trademark 'Schweini' with the German Patent and Trademark Office in mid-2005, asserting that the term served as a colloquial diminutive for nearly all words containing the component 'Schwein' (pig). He claimed his sole intent was to label pork sausages and that he had not considered the footballer. He further argued that neither the footballer's identity nor individuality could be inferred from the term 'Schweini,' and that Schweinsteiger himself had, at the time, resisted and rejected the nickname.
The court did not accept this argument. By mid-2005, when the trademark was registered, numerous media outlets had already coined and used the nickname 'Schweini' for the footballer during their coverage of the 2005 Confederations Cup. Consequently, in the court's opinion, a legally protected, individualizable name already existed for the plaintiff at that time. Nicknames, in this context, also benefit from the specific legal protection afforded by name rights.
It is not contingent upon whether Schweinsteiger himself actively employed the nickname 'Schweini.' The public use of the nickname for Bastian Schweinsteiger and its attribution to the footballer Schweinsteiger in the media are sufficient in this regard. This public association also establishes name protection for the player identified by the nickname.
The court also found the defendant's assertion implausible that he had solely considered his sausage products during trademark registration, without any reference to the plaintiff. This skepticism was particularly fueled by the fact that the defendant subsequently registered the name 'Poldi' as a trademark and maintained close personal ties with FC Bayern.
Consequently, Schweinsteiger possesses a claim for injunctive relief due to the unauthorized use of the name 'Schweini' and is entitled to demand the deletion of the trademark. Furthermore, he can also seek damages for the unauthorized usage. To facilitate this, the defendant must provide him with comprehensive information and an account detailing the scope of the 'Schweini' name's use and the revenues generated therefrom.
Judgment of the Munich I Regional Court, File No. 4 HK 12806/06
Source: Press release of the Munich I Regional Court dated March 8, 2007
2:0 – Schweinsteiger Not Required to Pay Additional Legal Fees
The national player was successful before the 34th Civil Chamber of the Munich I Regional Court.
The plaintiff claimed residual compensation from the defendant for legal services in a number of proceedings. The work mainly related to the defense of claims by the defendant's former player advisor/agent and claims against the defendant's legal expenses insurance. The plaintiff demanded outstanding fees in the amount of approximately €28,000.00. The defendant objected that the justified claims had already been settled by the legal expenses insurance. The plaintiff was not entitled to any further claims; in particular, some of the alleged orders were disputed.
The action was dismissed today by the competent civil chamber.
In the end, the chamber was not convinced that the plaintiff was still entitled to claims. In the opinion of the chamber, some of the claims have already been settled by payments from the defendant's legal expenses insurance. In addition, some of the compensation had been settled several times, although it could only have been asserted once. Finally, in the opinion of the Board, the plaintiff was also unable to prove that it had been commissioned at all with regard to some claims, despite the fact that evidence had been taken.
Proceedings of the Munich I Regional Court, File No. 34 O 21175/06, not yet legally binding
Source: Press release of the Munich I Regional Court dated March 3, 2009
Goldberg Rechtsanwälte
Attorney Michael Ullrich, LL.M. (Information Law)
Specialist Attorney for Information Technology Law
Email: info@goldberg.de
