German newssite Focus reports of a further development in the Flocke polar bear trade mark saga. A sweets company from a small village from the Allgaeu region has managed to file three trade mark applications for "Flocke" securing a filing date of 13 January 2008, that is three days earlier than the filing date of the Nuremberg zoo's trade marks. The city of Nuremberg, where the polar cub was born, is not impressed and has stopped the sweets company via a preliminary injunction from marketing or selling any of their products under the trade mark "Flocke". A spokesperson for the sweets company is quoted as saying "we liked the name a lot. It was pure instinct to file for trade mark protection". According to Focus, the sweets company had also planned to develop various products to be marketed under the trade mark "Flocke", however, the spokesperson could not confirm what kind of products the company had envisioned. According to Focus, this case will now soon go to a full trial at the Nuremberg court.

A quick search of the official register reveals that the trade marks in question are: German trade mark application No. 302008002059.8 Flocke das Eisbärbaby in classes 28, 3, 5 and 8; German trade mark application No. 302008002057.1 Eisbär Flocke in classes 28, 3, 5 and 8 and German trade mark application No. 302008002056.3 Flocke der Eisbär in classes 28, 3, 5 and 8, all three with a filing date of 13 January 2008.

Focus, in the same article, also updates the interested reader on German singer Patrick Lindner's potential rights in the trade mark "Flocke". We reported earlier that that German crooner Patrick Lindner claimed he may own trade mark rights for "Flocke". However, as a quick look at the German official register had soon revealed, German trade mark No. 2076997 Flocke had already expired in 2004. Lindner's lawyer now admits that "... trade marks usually lapse, in cases where the renewal fees are not paid", something which may have been the case here, he concedes. However, his client was still using the "Edition Flocke" brand to distribute his songs and therefore open to dialogue, his lawyer points out.

Class 46 boldly predicts that the Flocke trade mark saga is far from over and ventures the guess that more "right owners" will try to get a slice from the Flocke cake.