In the opposition proceedings of Eckes-Granini, proprietor of the trade mark "YO", against the International Olympic Committee, applicant of "YOG (fig.)", the Swiss Federal Administrative Court had the opportunity to give some practical guidelines on the proof of "genuine use" of a trade mark (which, in Switzerland as in most countries, is required for the mark to remain enforceable after an initial 5 year period after registration).

Whether use is genuine use of the mark in the sense of the law depends on the goods claimed; in case of relatively cheap, mass market goods, a larger number must be sold than in case of high-priced luxury goods (nothing new here).

Here, YO was (allegedly) used for fruit juice, a product falling into the "cheap mass market product" category. A sale of 4,320 bottles to a single customer in an 8 month period was not genuine use. If a product that is usually sold to a great many customers - such as cheap consumer products - is sold only to a single customer, this gives rise to the presumption that the use is token use (that's pretty harsh, I believe. Not entirely unrealistic, though).

A list of revenue (allegedly) generated with goods bearing the trade mark in Switzerland and Germany during the relevant period is insufficient to prove genuine use because a) it is only a contention of a party, b) the list does not show that the sales were actually made under the mark YO, and c) the list does not show whether the sales were made to more than one customer, which is relevant for the genuine use in case of cheap consumer goods (well - to be fair to Eckes-Granini, it couldn't know this was relevant, because the Court just introduced this criteria for the first time...).

Summary of the case here (in German).