The EU Intellectual Property Office shows how differences in trademark disputes over brand identity and consumer confusion play out in Europe versus in the United States. How might this liquor dispute have unfolded in the US, and how do evidentiary standards change?
The Dispute
Jägermeister is a leader in the herbal liqueur market, ranking among the top ten imported liqueurs in the US. ’When competitor Polini Group’ attempted to register the brand name Alten Kräuterfrau, Jägermeister objected. In 2022, the EUIPO initially dismissed the objection, finding the competing branding “visually and aurally dissimilar and conceptually similar to a low degree.”
Jägermeister appealed, and in 2025, the EUIPO reversed its decision. The appellate ruling cited Jägermeister’s reputation and the risk that consumers could confuse the two products if placed side by side on the same shelf. This, combined with comparable gothic-style fonts, color schemes, and overall configuration, was sufficient to raise actionable consumer confusion concerns.
What Are the Venue Differences Between the US and the EUIPO?
The EUIPO’s analysis turned on brand reputation and conceptual similarity. These factors carry significant weight in European trademark proceedings. If the dispute were to arise in the United States under the Lanham Act, the evidentiary requirements would be different. US courts adjudicating trademark infringement cases frequently rely on empirical evidence of actual consumer perception. Consumer survey research is widely used as evidence of consumer confusion.
A U.S. court would assess whether consumers show measurable confusion when they encounter Alten Kräuterfrau’s mark, with or without also seeing Jägermeister’s mark. Properly designed likelihood of confusion surveys interview a representative sample of consumers of the accused company’s products or services, and measure whether those consumers believe the products or services come from the same company, or that one is affiliated with, licensed by, or otherwise connected to the accuser. Whether consumers who find Alten Kräuterfrau in a retail setting associate it with Jägermeister is a question that this type of survey research is designed to answer.
On the defense side, Polini Group could commission its own consumer survey research to affirmatively demonstrate that US consumers distinguish between the two brands. If either party introduces survey evidence, an expert rebuttal survey could be useful to challenge the methodology and limit the weight the court assigns to the opposing party’s findings.
Instruction for Brand Owners
Litigation surveys can produce defensible data about whether consumer confusion exists. This type of empirical evidence can be decisive. IMS Legal Strategies’ survey experts design and conduct likelihood of confusion surveys, secondary meaning surveys, and survey rebuttals meeting legal and social science standards. Our team brings decades of experience testifying in federal and state courts, as well as before the US Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, and the BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division (NAD), on precisely these types of intellectual property disputes. Contact us to discuss how survey evidence can strengthen your position.
