‎Brazil News

 

Court suspends execution against Putos wine and cancels seizure

Court considered lack of full defense and adversarial system and sentenced. Complaint in the STF awaits decision by Minister André Mendonça.

From the Editors

 

Monday, February 17, 2025

 

Updated at 14:49

 

The wine brand Putos, created by comedians Danilo Gentili, Diogo Portugal and Oscar Filho, managed to suspend the provisional execution brought by the French brand "Petrus" against the importers responsible for marketing the wine.

 

The TJ/SP recognized the losses that would be caused if the importer were compelled, from the outset, to destroy the wine stock before the final judgment of the claims. 

 

Furthermore, the first instance judge annulled the search and seizure carried out by the Federal Revenue Service.

 

Understand the case

 

The legal dispute began in December 2024, when Judge Larissa Gaspar Tunala, from the 1st Business and Arbitration Conflicts Court of São Paulo/SP, sentenced importers Porto a Porto and Casa Flora for trademark infringement, ordering them to refrain from selling Putos wines.

 

Subsequently, Petrus began the provisional execution of the sentence, applying fines and restrictive measures against the companies.

 

However, the TJ/SP  suspended the destruction of the wine stock and  extinguished the provisional enforcement of the sentence.

 

Case : 2181591-21.2024.8.26.0000

Search and seizure cancelled

 

On January 31, the Federal Revenue Service and the Federal Police appeared at the Porto a Porto headquarters to search and seize the Putos wine stock. The action was later reported in the lawsuit, leading the judge to annul the act .

 

In the decision , the judge clarified that there was no order for due diligence at the importer's establishment and that the retention of products by the IRS should be limited to goods still in the import phase, without involving stocks already internalized in the country .

 

Case : 1082835-82.2024.8.26.0100

 

 

Judge condemns wine Putos  by Danilo Gentili, for imitating the label and promoting the Petrus brand. (Image: Reproduction/Instagram)

Complaint to the STF

 

In view of the decision of the TJ/SP, Casa Flora filed a complaint with the Supreme Federal Court, which was forwarded to Minister André Mendonça. The rapporteur requested information from the president of the TJ/SP, as well as an opinion from the Public Prosecutor's Office and statements from the parties.

 

The company's request is based on the thesis of freedom of expression in indirect parody , arguing that the name "Putos" does not constitute trademark infringement and represents a legitimate humorous creation .

 

The complaint awaits a decision by the rapporteur, Minister André Mendonça.

 

Lawyers Faissal Yunes Junior (Yunes Advocacia Boutique) and Ricardo Sayeg (HSLAW - Hasson Sayeg, Novaes e Venturole Advogados) are working on the case.

 

Case : Rcl 74.392

Follow us on

 

controversial label

Danilo Gentilli's Putos wine is unfair competition to "Petrus"

Judge recognized trademark infringement and ordered compensation of R$50,000, in addition to lost profits to be determined.

From the Editors

 

Tuesday, December 17, 2024

 

Updated December 18, 2024 07:58

 

 

The São Paulo Court of Justice has convicted the companies responsible for marketing the Putos wine, created by comedians Danilo Gentili, Diogo Portugal and Oscar Filho, for violating the trademark of the renowned Petrus.

 

The decision was made by Judge Larissa Gaspar Tunala, of the 1st Business and Arbitration Conflicts Court of São Paulo/SP, concluding  that the satire exceeded the limits of creative freedom, constituting unfair competition and improper use of the brand.

 

 

 

Judge sentences Danilo Gentili's "Putos" wine for imitating the Petrus brand and promoting its label, constituting unfair competition. (Image: Reproduction/Instagram)

Understand the case

 

The dispute involved the label of the Putos wine, launched by comedians Danilo Gentili, Diogo Portugal and Oscar Filho, supposedly inspired by the prestigious Petrus brand.

 

Petrus claimed that the Putos wine label reproduced distinctive Petrus elements, such as the combination and alternation of colors, the royal seal in red, the vineyards and the Gothic font.

 

He argued that the satire, in addition to diluting the brand's prestige, had a commercial connotation with the sale of the product.

 

The companies producing Putos denied the accusations, arguing that there was no possibility of confusion between the products, since Putos wines are intended for different audiences and have different commercial values.

 

The defense also argued that the word Putos has a distinct cultural meaning in Portugal and that the labels featured original elements, such as caricatures.

 

Court Decision

 

The judge initially highlighted that the similarity between the labels was unequivocal, recognizing that the Putos brand was based on the visual identity of Petrus. According to the decision.

 

The Putos wine label was inspired by the Petrus wine brand, considering that, when comparing them, one observes the existence of a 'reinterpretation'.

 

In addition to the visual elements, the judge emphasized the similarity between the names, pointing out that "the names Petrus and Putos are phonetically similar, as they begin with the sound of the letter P and end with the sounds 'OS' and 'US'."

 

He further emphasized that the use of the name and style of the label was deliberately intended to satirize the original brand.

 

All Putos promotion has always had as a strategy the reference to the author brand, so the piggyback effect is sufficiently proven.

 

Another argument was the recognition that Putos wine does not promote direct competition with Petrus, due to differences in public and price, but that, even so, trademark infringement occurred.

 

The judge stated that the offense was configured by the undue use of the prestige of the original brand, characterizing unfair competition through free riding.

 

The decision also dismissed the defense of freedom of artistic expression, highlighting that the commercial use of satire exceeded legal limits.

 

Freedom of expression does not extend to commercial products, especially when there is brand dilution and intent to profit at the expense of its prestige.

 

In the end, the judge ordered the companies to refrain from importing, distributing, marketing and advertising products with labels that constitute a violation of the Petrus brand, under penalty of a daily fine.

 

It also determined the payment of R$50,000 in compensation for moral damages and set the material damages in the form of lost profits, to be determined in the settlement of the judgment.

 

Case :  1082835-82.2024.8.26.0100

 

 link: https://www.migalhas.com.br/quentes/421780/vinho-putos--de-danilo-gentilli-e-concorrencia-desleal-com-petrus