It is often said that there is a potential risk of what is known as “dilution by blurring” of a trademark, yet we rarely have the opportunity to analyse a real and notable case in which no legal consequences may arise.
At the outset, it should be noted that dilution by blurring generally presupposes the use of a similar sign by a third party that weakens the distinctive character of a famous or well-known trademark through multiple associations. In the example we present, there is the additional peculiarity that the situation arises from the proximity between the business origin of different brands rather than from any similarity between them; however, it is precisely this proximity that undermines its legal relevance.
The fact, known to a significant part of the public—at least among those interested in economic news—is the acquisition by the German group Henkell of 100% of the share capital of the cava producer Freixenet in the current year 2026.
The immediate implications are openly acknowledged by the acquiring group itself, outlining a scenario of coexistence between products with different origins, production methods and traditional positioning, including Sekt, a sparkling wine historically associated with the German market. Consequently, there is a risk of loss of identity for Freixenet as an emblematic cava brand, due to its integration into a large foreign and “multi-sparkling” group. This risk stems directly from the perception of the average consumer, a key factor in assessing distinctiveness and reputation. Clearly, one element to consider is the starting position of the Freixenet brand, defined by the following factors:
- High inherent distinctiveness.
- Enhanced distinctiveness resulting from:
- Intensive use over decades.
- An almost automatic association with cava, both as a product category and as a symbol of origin and tradition.
- Status as a well-known or reputed trademark, within the meaning of Article 8 of the Spanish Trademark Act and Article 9(2)(c) of the EUTMR, recognisable beyond the strictly cava-consuming public.
This reputation was built on clear and relatively exclusive attributes:
- Catalan origin (Penedès).
- Traditional production method.
- Accessible premium festive positioning.
- Differentiation from other European sparkling wines, including German Sekt.
The effects of the association with HENKELL and Sekt
There is an induced mental association in the public; from the moment Freixenet becomes 100% German-owned and it is repeatedly communicated that it forms part of a group leading in Sekt, Prosecco, Champagne and Cava, the average European consumer (and especially non-Spanish consumers) may begin to perceive the Freixenet brand no longer as “the leading Catalan cava brand,” but rather as just another brand within an international sparkling wine conglomerate.
This phenomenon does not require direct product confusion; an economic or conceptual association is sufficient, in line with European case law on reputed trademarks.
Dilution of distinctiveness through blurring arises from the following conditions:
- The Freixenet brand no longer evokes, in a unique manner, a specific type of sparkling wine and a particular origin.
- It becomes mentally integrated into a constellation of brands within the Henkell Freixenet group, where another sparkling wine, Sekt, occupies a central role in terms of volume and business history.
The more Freixenet is perceived as interchangeable, standardised and aligned with transnational industrial logic, the weaker its independent distinctive capacity becomes, particularly in relation to other “non-cava” sparkling wines.
Ultimately, there is a risk of reputational “contamination,” given that Sekt is often associated with a more industrial product of lower prestige than cava. Therefore, a reverse transfer of attributes may occur, whereby Freixenet loses part of its traditional premium image and becomes associated with a more generic global sparkling wine perception.
Conclusion
Overall, it can be argued that:
- The full acquisition of Freixenet by Henkell has created a clear public association between the brand and a group historically identified with German Sekt.
- This association entails an objective risk of dilution of distinctiveness, as the exclusive link between Freixenet and cava as an identity category is weakened.
- There is also a reputational risk arising from the possible transfer of less prestigious perceptions associated with Sekt.
- The consequences of this risk, given the absence of use of the Freixenet mark by a third party in the strict sense, cannot be legally challenged on the basis of trademark rights.
In conclusion, it is important to highlight the potential harm that certain business strategies may entail for a company’s own brands, with the corresponding benefit for genuinely competing brands.
Article by Jaume Layola.
