Haribo threatening Legal Action against suppliers!

[david@naughtyvend]

It's a bluff...

Trademark law allows resale of any product 'as that product' so long as it is not rebranded under another name, Haribo sweets as tubz vending sweets or vice versa selling another product as Haribo which is the more obvious issue. The tubz vending machine is in its own right a brand, by removal of any labelling mentioning their own brand upon the tub this removes all chances of confusion and possibility of being under a passing off claim. However should the product delivery vessel (the tub) have "tubz vending" upon it Haribo could argue an infringement exists, which is expensive to argue about...

To argue that the tubz vending machine itself is the branded vessel would be like arguing Tesco should remove their name from the front of shop. Once a product has been sold bearing a brand then its use is royalty paid, example a Ford car in a second hand dealership doesn't need the badges removed but there's a clear difference in using a brand to sell goods such as branding your shop Easy Vend in an orange machine which is a clear infringement of a brand.

I'd go back to them and ask Haribo to state their case more clearly as to what the actual objection is.

[PGBrew]

Pringles, Skittles, Haribo & Minstrels are recognided brands & sell product. Salysol, Sandral, tubz vending, Hurley, Sweetfix Snack A Can. etc are not recognised brands by the buying public. Displaying their logos therefore won't help sell product. I keep my machines plain & let the product display the name.

[Ade]

kingsway just as good and more variety

ade

[kris@tubzbrandsltd]

Hi all,

I feel that I need to make this post to clear up a couple of issues regarding Haribo writing to suppliers regarding repacking their products and using the Haribo Branding.

As you all are aware that we were the first supplier to launch the Haribo products (purchased direct from Haribo UK and with their permission to repack and use any logo or marketing that we use have been sent to us from the Haribo marketing department). A competitor company then started supplying the same Haribo products as us,(purchased via a third party according to our Haribo Rep) and also the competitor started repacking and marketing the Tangfastics & Starmix flagship products from Haribo. We then asked Haribo UK if we could repack these products as some of our customers had heard that the lines were selling well.

Haribo UK then Informed us and said that they DO NOT sell these two products in bulk and never will do as the do not want any other companies repacking their two flagship brands. Haribo then informed us that the only way any company would be able to get hold of these two brands would be if they purchased the retail bags and used them for repacking which they informed us would be in breach of their registered trademarks. We then left the matter at that as Haribo had made their position extremely clear. We then some months later received a letter from the Haribo marketing department asking us to remove any of their branding from our website for the moment as a result of checks their legal department had come across some companies in breach of the use of their registered trademarks and until the matter had been resolved they are asking any company repacking their products to do the same.

tubz vending Brands did not under any circumstances try to or did complain to Haribo regarding another company supplying products. tubz vending only asked if they could supply the products that were already being sold by a competitor as it turns out without any permission whatsoever. With all the products tubz vending Supply we have the express permission from the manufacture to repack that product. It is also important to note that if the correct permissions are not obtained then any public liability insurances will not be covered as due diligence check will always form a part of any potential claim. In many cases to obtain the repacking licenses we have had to undergo full audits of our packing facilities & premises. We would urge anyone to ensure that when they are buying from any supplier they insure that they are repacking with the express permission of the manufacture especially where major brands are concerned.

I have had operators saying to me that we sent a complaint to Haribo saying that another company is supplying unlicensed products under their own brand this is NOT true.

We ourselves are very disappointed that Haribo UK have asked us to remove any Haribo branding for the time being especially as it was other companies illegal repacking of the two top Haribo brands that has caused the situation and surely the question has to be asked if this is the same for any other branded products from other manufactures supplied! We have been informed by our Haribo rep that any companies repacking the Tanfastics or Star mix products have been sent letters direct from Haribos solicitors who are seeking compensation for any products sold and require the information on quantity supplied and who or where the product have been supplied to. We do however understand that Haribo have to protect their name as they spend millions on marketing each year.

We didn’t react straight away to the post made by Flint Vending as we were still working with Haribo on a repacking agreement that will still allow us to repack using their branding but it will now be more structured for particular product lines instead of open ended to all their bulk lines.

Again we are always looking at new products to keep a great range of choice for your customers. Please remember that we always have our price promise in place where we guarantee to BEAT any competitor quote together with the knowledge that you will not have any potential problems with the legality of the product supplied, so please contact your account manager for details on how we can save you even more money on your orders.

[david@naughtyvend]

Kris,

How do Haribo define re-packaging of their products as IP infringement when to my understanding at least the unmentioned third party were selling the product as Haribo and utilising the brand upon the container?

On assumption the "repack" was done in a food safe environment surely this would be compliant in IP and FSA regard, with perhaps only a breach of a distribution agreement to which the unmentioned third party were not a subscriber to, thus not in brecah thereof. I'm not chucking mud here it just seems that maybe there's a confusion in either terminology or fully understanding the position in the surrounding circumstances.

Dave.

[choice vending]

Haribo is a strong brand. tubz vending Hurleys ans sweetfix are also brands. Two brands on on item is maybe a bit much. I would guess for this to work the labling of tubz vending, Hurleys and sweetfix would need to be submissive to allow the stronger brand of harribo to stand out

[david@naughtyvend]

Haribo is a strong brand. tubz vending Hurleys ans sweetfix are also brands. Two brands on on item is maybe a bit much. I would guess for this to work the labling of tubz vending, Hurleys and sweetfix would need to be submissive to allow the stronger brand of harribo to stand out

I agree, yes... but it's also true to say (and Kris mentions this) that sometimes certain brands do not want to be associated with certain channels of retail sale. Vending for example..., for that reason you sometimes find buried in distribution agreements phrases like "approved channel" and reference to grey sales i.e. goods being imported and sold within a territory of another.

It gets quite murky sometimes and lines can be unclear. Which is why I asked for a wee bit of clarification from Kris there, is this an IP dispute or other form of disagreement on the part of Haribo. In other words, "What's their point caller?"