'So relieved that the Court found I could
'one of the most challenging and difficult periods of my life'
The following day (21st October) the CIVC gave the following statement to wine journalist Jeni Port, which she then published on Twitter:
despite ruling demonstrating that
there was no need to bring this case ...
I wonder why the CIVC's claim of 'vain attempts at mediation' reminds me of Veuve Clicquot's 'amicable conversation' with Ciro Picariello ... Does a great white shark perhaps negotiate with a surfer before using their teeth ...?
Following this comment from the CIVC and with advice and permission from her legal team Jayne Powell has made these comments:
"I have been reflecting on the Federal Court judgment and what it means, which is why I did not comment immediately upon its publication last week.
"I am so relieved and pleased that the Court found I could keep my ‘Champagne Jayne’ name. This means my ‘Champagne Jayne’ business name, website and social media accounts can continue.
"If I want, I can also pursue the registration of my trade mark CHAMPAGNE JAYNE in Class 41 - Entertainer services; public speaking services; author services being the writing of texts (other than publicity texts); event management services (organisation of educational, entertainment, sporting or cultural events); master of ceremonies services.
"Champagne v sparkling wines
"Social Media Use
• The Court found that some aspects of my social media use in the past did not make it clear enough that sparkling wine is not champagne.
"Merci, Danke, Thank You
• You know that this has been one of the most challenging and difficult periods of my life. Three years of litigation have taken a very substantial personal and financial toll, and its not quite over yet.
• You have picked me up and kept me going (on social media and in person).
• You have given me good advice, kept things light and social when I needed it, and been a shoulder to lean on when times have been tough.
• You know who you are, and I sincerely thank you each and every one of you, from the bottom of my heart.
How events unfolded:
Here is the Federal Court judgment in full
Details on the trademark opposition here:
Here are some of the relevant sections of the judgment:
"Third, although the communications may be fleeting in real time, the repetition over an extended time frame of similar types of communications may demonstrate a pattern of more enduring and potentially infringing conduct. (para )"