Zuru has achieved victory in its prolonged legal battle with Lego, as the Court of Appeal reversed a High Court decision that had previously ruled Zuru infringed Lego’s trademark.
The dispute focused on a straightforward phrase printed on the packaging of Zuru’s MAX Build More plastic brick building kits: “LEGO® BRICK COMPATIBLE.”
Lego claimed that the wording violated its trademark and could mislead consumers into believing that Zuru’s more affordable bricks were Lego products or officially endorsed by Lego.
In 2023, the High Court ruled that Zuru had infringed Lego’s trademark, but today the Court of Appeal overturned that decision, stating the High Court was mistaken.
The judges determined Zuru’s statement only indicates to consumers that the bricks are compatible with Lego, rather than claiming they are genuine Lego bricks.
“When use of LEGO is seen in its full context, the consumer would think that Zuru’s bricks were MAX BUILD MORE bricks,” the court said.
“The phrase ‘LEGO® BRICK COMPATIBLE’ is descriptive, not a badge of origin.”
The court also rejected Lego’s counterclaims of passing off and misleading conduct under the Fair Trading Act, noting that shoppers would clearly recognise Zuru’s own brand, MAX Build More, on the packaging.
The ruling aligns the legal precedent with Australia’s approach to “comparative advertising,” which involves using a competitor’s trademark to compare products. Under New Zealand law, comparative advertising is permitted as long as it is truthful and not misleading.