Velcro Industries BV v John Stedman & Laurie Male

Velcro Industries BV (the applicant) sought to register the trade mark VELCRO in Australia for a variety of goods, including hook and loop fastening devices. John Stedman and Laurie Male (the respondents) opposed this registration, arguing that the mark was not distinctive and had become a generic term for the product. The matter came before the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the trade mark VELCRO had acquired distinctiveness in Australia, despite its widespread use as a descriptive term for hook and loop fasteners. The Court was required to consider the provisions of the *Trade Marks Act 1954* (Cth) concerning the registrability of marks that may have become generic or descriptive through common usage.

Justice Terry Williams found that while VELCRO was indeed used descriptively by the public, this did not necessarily mean it had lost its distinctiveness as a trade mark. His Honour considered evidence of the applicant's extensive advertising and promotion of VELCRO as a brand name, which had led to significant public recognition of the mark as indicating the origin of goods. The Court applied the principle that a mark can acquire distinctiveness through use, even if it also has a descriptive meaning, provided that the primary perception of the mark by the relevant public is as a trade mark. The Court ultimately found that the VELCRO mark had acquired sufficient distinctiveness to be registered.