Alaska Airlines Not Soaring After Losing Appeal
Alaska Airlines (“Alaska”) recently lost an appeal over a trademark licensing agreement at the Court of Appeal in London, in a decision favoring Virgin Group. Alaska was ordered to pay approximately $8 million per year until 2039 in royalties, even though Alaska no longer uses the Virgin brand.
The Trademark Licensing Agreement
The appeal gave rise to an issue of contractual interpretation of what was, at its core, a 2014 trademark licensing agreement (the “Agreement”).
The Agreement was between Virgin Group and Virgin America Inc., the latter of which merged with Alaska, which assumed all rights and obligations under the Agreement. Alaska thereby became party to the Agreement pursuant to which Virgin Group had granted Virgin America Inc. the use of certain Virgin names and trademarks in exchange for yearly royalty payments for 25 years.
Leading Up To The Appeal
By 2019, Alaska had ceased use of all Virgin names and trademarks, and stopped making royalty payments. Alaska was of the view that requiring it to pay millions of dollars per year for trademarks it was not using was commercially nonsensical.
Virgin Group successfully sued Alaska in London’s High Court. A judge ruled that the royalty was a flat fee payable for the right to use the Virgin brand, regardless of whether that right was exercised or not.
The Court of Appeal ultimately agreed with the High Court’s interpretation of the Agreement.
Author: Hannah Lee, 2024/2025 Articling Student-At-Law
Photo Credit: https://unsplash.com/@rparmly
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Kansas City Chiefs Stars Sued for Trademark Infringement Over Steakhouse
The sneaker company, 1587 Sneakers, is reportedly suing Kansas City Chiefs players, Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce, along with their restaurant partners, for trademark infringement.1587 Sneakers… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence…