The mere disclosure of information from a third party regarding a possible act of infringement, in the absence of a court ruling, constitutes disparagement (Paris Court of Appeal, December 4, 2025, Kanra Publishing France v. Kleverage SPRL).
Kanra Publishing France entered into a collaboration agreement with Kleverage, the licensed publisher of Playboy, entitling Kanra to use the Playboy brand and the “Rabbit Head” logo.
Kanra Publishing terminated its agreement with its European publisher Kleverage.
Kleverage then published press releases online, on the website www.playboy.fr, on the Instagram and X (formerly Twitter) accounts Playboy France, and by publishing an editorial in the fall 2024 issue of Playboy magazine, and sent emails to Kanra Publishing’s partners announcing the end of their relationship and stating that Kanra Publishing would be guilty of counterfeiting if it continued to publish titles.
The judges first pointed out that disclosing information that could discredit a competitor is considered product disparagement, regardless of whether it is accurate (Cass., Civ. September 24, 2013, appeal no. 12-19790).
They then applied a ruling by the Court of Cassation stating that « constitutes (…) an act of disparagement the act of warning the customers or distributors of a competing company’s products of the existence of a risk of counterfeiting or unfair or parasitic competition when this information is not based on any court decision, a fortiori when the warning is issued without any action having been brought “ (Civ., October 16, 2025, appeal no. 24-11.150).
This disparagement has led the author of the disparagement to be sentenced to:
– remove all press releases, subject to a penalty of €5,000 per message and per day of publication from the date of the decision,
– cease to disparage the press titles published by Kanra Publishing, subject to a penalty of €5,000 per message and per day of publication from the date of the decision;
The judges also authorized Kanra Publishing to:
– publish the operative part of the decision in large, legible characters on the front page of the website www.playboy.fr and on the Playboy France Instagram account for three months, at the sole expense of Kleverage SPRL, subject to a penalty of €1,000 per day of delay;
– publish the operative part of the decision in two press titles of its choice at the expense of Kleverage SPRL, up to a limit of €5,000 including tax per insertion.
The bad press has finally changed sides!
This decision serves as a reminder that particular care should be taken when communicating with other economic players, whether they are direct competitors or not.
LINKEA represents its clients before the courts and may also assist you in securing your communication. Please do not hesitate to contact us!