Entain claims Sportingwin’s brand is too similar to Sportingbet and therefore infringes on its trademark according to court documents.
Its trademark was approved in 2020 when the Bulgarian operator was first established. Sportingwin CEO Miroslav Rashev told iGB that the two brands had previously operated across different markets in relative harmony.
A side-by-side comparison of the brands:
Entain has said it has the right to prohibit third party entities from using wording that is similar enough to cause confusion among players for commercial use, as per its EU trademark issued in 2017.
It does not want its reputation to be “overshadowed and prejudiced” by conflicting and contravening brands, the filing said.
Sportingwin confident of out-of-court settlement
The court did initially approve Entain’s request to temporarily cease Sportingwin’s use of its domain. However this halt was revoked when Sportingwin submitted its reply.
In its own filing, Sportingwin called for compensation as a result of these interim measures, noting there was no legal basis for the decree.
The case will be heard in October, and CEO Rashev believes it could be settled outside of court.
Entain was contacted for comment but did not respond by the time of publishing.
Entain’s previous challenge rejected by Czech court
This isn’t the first dispute between the two operators, as Entain filed a similar case with the Czech Arbitration Court’s Arbitration Center for Internet Disputes in February 2023.
Entain disputed the sportingwin.com and sportingwin.net domain names, noting the brand was “visually identical to the Sportingbet brand and trademarks”.
The court ultimately rejected Entain’s claims and granted the sportingwin domains could remain with the operator.
Original article: https://igamingbusiness.com/legal-compliance/entain-sportingwin-trade-infringement-case/
