A good summary story about the Canada Supreme Court’s unanimous trademark decisions last Friday (rightly) rejecting two (overreaching) infringement claims. The story’s opening paragraphs:

Barbie dolls are superficial and bland and are unlikely to be confused with sizzling steaks at the independent Montreal chain of Barbie restaurants, Canada’s Supreme Court ruled in a trademark case Friday.

The court also prevented the champagne house Veuve Clicquot from stopping an upstart Canadian women’s clothing chain from using the name Les Boutiques Cliquot even though the stores admitted to being inspired by the French bubbly.

You can read the Canada Supreme Court’s opinions, in Mattel and in Veuve Clicquot.

UPDATE:  David French, of Canada Patent Blog, summarizes the cases this way:

These two decisions are interesting, but not surprising. No doubt many attorneys for large corporations will be stirred-up by this short-fall in their ability to protect their client’s interests in famous marks in Canada. The lesson to be learned is that the Supreme Court of Canada still feels that the trademark law, at least in Canada, exists to protect the public against confusion, and not to protect corporations from loss of trade.

To which I can only add: thank heaven for the Supreme Court of Canada.