13.2.2015

Crocs, Inc. – Enforcement of Crocs’ Famous 3D Trade Mark

Crocs is a world leader in innovative casual footwear for men, women and children. Since its inception in 2002, Crocs has sold more than 300 million pairs of shoes in more than 90 countries around the world. With a unique and popular design, Crocs relies on enforcing its intellectual property rights against replica products.

We represented Crocs in trade mark litigation concerning the infringement of Crocs’ three-dimensional trade mark protecting its famous Classic shoe. The court upheld our infringement claim and ordered the defendant to pay damages.

Latest references

We successfully represented Arctic Biomaterials Oy before the Finnish Market Court in an extensive dispute concerning alleged patent infringement and invalidity of the patent-in-suit. Our client has invented next-generation bioabsorbable composites that are engineered with Arctic Biomaterials’ X3 bioactive natural mineral fibers, offering robust, bioactive reinforcement for orthopedic implants. These advanced composites empower customers to create high-strength bioabsorbable solutions for the most demanding applications. Back in 2019, Purac Biochem B.V. alleged, among other things, that our client’s Evolvecomp product had infringed Purac Biochem B.V.’s European patent validated in Finland protecting a biocompatible composite and its use. Purac Biochem B.V. filed a preliminary injunction against our client under the Act on Securing the Provision of Evidence in Civil Cases Concerning Industrial Property Rights and Copyright (344/2000). The Finnish Market Court issued an ex-parte injunction against our client on 2 April 2019 (MAO:150/19) and a final injunction on 19 February 2020 (MAO:59/20). Our client had disputed Purac Biochem B.V.’s patent infringement claim from the beginning and claimed that the patent-in-suit was invalid. After five years of litigation, the Finnish Market Court handed down a ruling in the joined invalidity and infringement cases on 10 October 2024 (MAO:560/2024 and MAO:561/2024) declaring Purac Biochem B.V.’s patent invalid and dismissing Purac’s infringement action against Arctic Biomaterials. Also, the preliminary injunction based on an alleged patent infringement imposed against Arctic Biomaterials was cancelled. The Market Court declared Purac Biochem B.V.’s patent invalid due to a lack of inventive step. The Market Court applied the could-would method for determining whether the patent-in-suit is inventive or not. The could-would method is based on determining whether a person skilled in the art would (not simply could, but would) have made a specific improvement to prior solutions, based on the available prior art. The Market Court ruled that it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art to solve the objective technical problem of the patent-in-suit in the manner presented in claim 1, using as a starting point the closest prior art (prior patent publication) and combining it with the teaching of another prior art publication. The decision is final.
Case published 29.1.2025
We are advising Valio in brand protection and intellectual property enforcement matters globally. Our IP team manages Valio’s global trademark, design and copyright portfolio, including registration, prosecution, opposition and enforcement. We also advise Valio in questions concerning IP licensing, consumer and marketing law, social media, domain names and cybersquatting, and food sector regulation. Valio is Finland’s biggest dairy business and food exporter with EUR 1.7 billion annual net sales. Valio’s products are found in some 60 countries and account for 25% of Finland’s total food exports. The company’s R&D work follows the footsteps of Nobel Prize winner A.I. Virtanen, and Valio has some 4,200 employees around the world. The Valio brand has been regularly recognised as one of the most valued brands in Finland. Other well-known and beloved brands of Valio include, among others, AURA, OLTERMANNI, POLAR and OIVARIINI.  
Case published 30.9.2020
We are advising Anora Group in brand protection and intellectual property enforcement matters globally. Our IP team manages Anora Group’s global trademark and design portfolio, including registration, prosecution, opposition and enforcement. We also advise Anora Group in questions concerning marketing law, social media, domain names and cybersquatting. Anora Group Plc is a publicly listed company. It was born in 2021 through the merger of the Finnish Altia Oyj and the Norwegian Arcus ASA. Anora Group is a leading wine and spirits brand house in the Nordic Region and a global industry forerunner in sustainability. Anora Group has a large portfolio of iconic brands such as Koskenkorva, Linie, Larsen, Skagerrak, Chill Out, Ruby Zin, Wongraven, O.P. Anderson and Falling Feather. Its key brands are exported to over 30 markets globally.
Case published 11.5.2020
We are acting for BMW AG in a trade mark and community design infringement case against a major rim distributor and reseller in Finland. After confirming the bulk of our client’s infringement claims, the Market Court is now moving on to the damages phase of the case. First, however, the court in mid-March issued its decision on our client’s document and information production claims. The court upheld our claims and ordered the defendant to disclose accounting materials, purchase and sale figures, supply chain data and other information. The Market Court’s order also has wider implications beyond just the case at hand. The Market Court very rarely issues formal document production orders, so the court’s holding is important in outlining the scope of such orders. The Market Court also rejected a number of arguments raised by the defendant which makes it significant in terms of the defences available to defendants in document production matters. The Market Court’s order is likely to be very happy news to IP proprietors and claimants in Finland. Traditionally, the Finnish courts have taken a very restrictive approach to document production orders. The Market Court’s order is an important step in the gradual liberalisation of case law. Finland is still a long way from US-style discovery proceedings, however. Note that the decision is still subject to appeal. The order is available in Finnish on the court’s website .
Case published 17.4.2019