Far-right party’s IKEA play hits legal snag at EU court

Belgium’s far-right Vlaams Belang party proposed restrictions on family reunification and shorter asylum appeal deadlines with illustrations resembling IKEA instruction figures.(CN) — After a Belgian far-right party borrowed IKEA’s look to sell an immigration crackdown, the EU’s top court issued a reminder Tuesday that political parody is no free pass to ride on a famous brand.Inter IKEA Systems asked the Court of Justice of the European Union to find trademark infringement against Belgium’s far-right Vlaams Belang party, turning to Brussels to clarify when political speech could justify borrowing somebody else’s famous brand.Free expression, including political parody, could outweigh a trademark owner’s rights, the judges said, but the speaker’s intentions mattered. “Use in bad faith cannot constitute healthy and fair competition or be classified as ‘due.’”The EU judges instructed national courts to weigh whether the message contributed to public debate, whether its context was commercial, how widely the brand was used and what harm that use could cause its owner.The judges recognized immigration as a matter of public interest and the campaign as a possible parody. Still, using IKEA’s reputation solely to amplify the message did not appear justified, they said, subject to the Belgian court’s assessment. Closely copied imagery and repeated online circulation could give audiences the impression that IKEA supported the campaign.Jan Janssen, who represented Inter IKEA Systems alongside Flip Petillion and Diégo Noesen, welcomed the clarification that political freedom did not justify using a famous brand’s reputation to promote an unrelated political message. “This is an important achievement for Inter IKEA Systems and for brand owners more broadly.”At a November 2022 press conference, Vlaams Belang presented 15 proposals for the Belgian government to assemble, with illustrations resembling IKEA instruction figures. Its IKEA acronym stood for Dutch words meaning Immigration Really Can Be Different.The Swedish connection went beyond furniture. The party drew on Sweden’s plans to tighten immigration rules, proposing restrictions on family reunification and shorter asylum appeal deadlines, according to contemporary reporting by a Belgian broadcaster.Inter IKEA sued in the Brussels Business Court eight days after the launch. The proceedings continued only against Vrijheidsfonds, the nonprofit that ran the campaign for the party. It acknowledges using the marks without permission but argues that its political message justifies doing so.The campaign borrowed more than IKEA’s name: Its lettering, colors and other visual elements closely resembled the company’s branding. Ilanah Fhima, professor of intellectual property law at University College London, praised the court’s nuanced approach to free speech but found its treatment of logos as more problematic than names particularly restrictive. “However commentators acknowledge that it is the logo that will attract the attention of consumers and really bring the message of a parody or commentary home.”Elena Izyumenko, assistant professor in intellectual property law at the University of Amsterdam, welcomed the speech-friendly framework but questioned the concern about implied endorsement, given the launch’s clarification of what its IKEA acronym meant.“For me, this is difficult to square with the court’s own recognition of parody: Using a very well-known symbol and putting it into a completely different context is often exactly how political parody works.”The judges told the Belgian court to check whether the campaign’s use of IKEA’s branding was commercial and linked to goods or services. The political platform itself did not qualify, though promotional materials could. Even without that commercial link, IKEA could still invoke trademark rules covering Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, but noncommercial speech could carry more weight.Michal Bohaczewski, partner in intellectual property at Agilit, said the ruling kept the door firmly shut on using free speech to justify purely commercial exploitation of famous brands. “Before the judgment, there were concerns that recognizing freedom of expression as due cause could open the door to infringers seeking to justify the use of signs as designations of goods for purely commercial purposes, particularly where such use was intended to be humorous.”Responding for Vlaams Belang, press officer Karen Van der Sype said: “The nonprofit organization Vrijheidsfonds of Vlaams Belang takes note of the ruling of the European Court of Justice and will thoroughly examine its scope in the context of further legal proceedings.”The EU’s interpretation cannot be appealed. Vrijheidsfonds agreed to stop using the marks pending a final decision in Belgium. The Belgian court will now have to apply that interpretation and decide whether the campaign infringed IKEA’s rights.Courthouse News reporter Eunseo Hong is based in the Netherlands.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads