NZ loses Manuka trademark fight with Australia

Welcome to NZ Beekeepers+
Would you like to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Sign up
A New Zealand-based association representing manuka honey beekeepers has lost its opposition to an application for the 'Australian Manuka' trade mark.

The Australian manuka honey industry has gathered over 5,000 pages of information to fight back in court against New Zealand’s recent attempts to trademark the name ‘manuka’ for its honey, after failed attempts to reach a truce.

www.foodnavigator-asia.com

Legal buzz: Australia takes to courts fight back against New Zealand’s manuka honey trademark attempt

The Australian manuka honey industry has gathered over 5,000 pages of information to fight back in court against New Zealand’s recent attempts to trademark the name ‘manuka’ for its honey, after failed attempts to reach a truce.
www.foodnavigator-asia.com www.foodnavigator-asia.com
 
Click to expand...
Grant

Grant

Staff member
Founder Member
Platinum
10,500
4,947
Jamo said:
the title of this tread does not match what is said in the article. did i miss something or does the title need changing?
Click to expand...
The title of the topic references a legal website which published the court case result. However that is paywalled, so its of no use to anyone. From what I can see there are no media releases on the result, so the main story talks about the case and how its being presented. Basically the OED was used based on the term Manuka

The Australian defence also used “the authoritative Oxford English dictionary definition of manuka as a native of New Zealand and Tasmania”.

The dictionary defines manuka as “a small tree with aromatic leaves which are sometimes used for tea, native to New Zealand and Tasmania”.

Hence native to Australia.
Where they won against the Te Reo version, was that in Te Reo its Maanuka or Mānuka not Manuka so they were able to trade mark it.
 
yesbut

yesbut

Staff member
11,951
7,048
Nelson
Experience
Hobbyist
The heading would have been easier to understand if "objection" had been used rather than "opposition" It's communication like this that has caused wars.
 
K

Kiwi Bee

37
18
Auckland
Experience
Hobbyist
Grant said:
The title of the topic references a legal website which published the court case result. However that is paywalled, so its of no use to anyone. From what I can see there are no media releases on the result, so the main story talks about the case and how its being presented. Basically the OED was used based on the term Manuka

The Australian defence also used “the authoritative Oxford English dictionary definition of manuka as a native of New Zealand and Tasmania”.

The dictionary defines manuka as “a small tree with aromatic leaves which are sometimes used for tea, native to New Zealand and Tasmania”.

Hence native to Australia.
Where they won against the Te Reo version, was that in Te Reo its Maanuka or Mānuka not Manuka so they were able to trade mark it.
Click to expand...

We should have always used Mānuka.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Grant
J

John B

3,606
6,746
Hawkes Bay
Experience
Commercial
Tea tree, manuka with or without a macron, kanuka and Kahikatoa are all listed as names for this one plant.
I am over the whole manuka thing and may just call it jelly bush honey from now on.
PS anyone who was offended by me not using a macron I apologise, I have no idea how to get my computer to write one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frazzledfozzle, Trevor Gillbanks and Grant
S

Scientia Sit Potentia

63
47
New Zealand
Experience
International
You may be over this but it is incredibly important as a trade mark. If NZ does not manage to protect the name we will not just have to contend with Australian Jelly Bush changing its name to Manuka. We will have any Tea Tree variant from any country. Any damage to the Manuka industry in NZ will damage the entire honey industry.
 
Grant

Grant

Staff member
Founder Member
Platinum
10,500
4,947
Do you think the way Australia manages its own original people would have any impact on their thoughts or their mana when dealing with a foreign indigenous group? I think its fair to say they don't care.
To me its a bit like the Chinese legal system not recognising international copyright, so their country's counterfeit operations can bring money into the country.

bighands said:
The maori never had a written language until after the european arrived but manuka was still here.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: kaihoka
S

StephenB

Banned
199
85
New Zealand
Experience
Commercial
Scientia Sit Potentia said:
You may be over this but it is incredibly important as a trade mark. If NZ does not manage to protect the name we will not just have to contend with Australian Jelly Bush changing its name to Manuka. We will have any Tea Tree variant from any country. Any damage to the Manuka industry in NZ will damage the entire honey industry.
Click to expand...
And its not pretty stuffed now thanks to the manuka wars ?
 
J

John B

3,606
6,746
Hawkes Bay
Experience
Commercial
I saw an article today from newsroom on manuka and the use of a macron.
Prices quoted for New Zealand honey were $19.23 average for non-manuka and $53.13 for manuka.
I would love to get half that for either. It's not helping beekeepers when farmers can see the sort of price and think that's what we're getting.
$5 and $15 would be close to the mark- if you can sell it.
Sorry I can't post the article but once again it is beyond my abilities.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: frazzledfozzle


Top