Words matter, and so do the rights to use them. When those words define a brand—Cohiba, in this case—they become property, valued and defended with a tenacity equal to any plot of land. Over the past several days, the United States has served as host to a rare trademark drama involving the May ruling on the Cohiba Cigar Trademark Cancellation regarding the vaunted “Cohiba” trademark from General Cigar Company’s U.S. registrations. After decades of legal jousting with Cuba’s Empresa Cubana del Tabaco, last week, General Cigar filed a new appeal in its 27-year legal battle with Cuba’s state-owned cigar company, Cubatabaco, over the U.S. rights to the Cohiba trademark. General is challenging procedural rulings stemming from the May 2025 decision that cancelled its trademarks. The case could determine whether U.S. courts or trade agencies have final authority on Cuban intellectual property rights under the trade embargo. If you are a Kansas City business, an international entrepreneur, or a cigar aficionado with ambitions, the lessons are neither theoretical nor trivial.
The Facts Behind the Smoke
“Cohiba” is synonymous worldwide with luxurious Cuban cigars, merchandise long denied formal market access in the United States owing to the embargo. General Cigar, a company which—through the magic of U.S. trademark law—possessed the exclusive right to sell “Cohiba” cigars in America, their own products manufactured outside of Havana’s purview. Cuba’s Empresa Cubana del Tabaco, a formidable claimant if ever there was one, spent decades seeking to void General’s registrations, citing international conventions, principles of “first use,” and the overlay of the United States’ embargo regime.
If you wish to understand what makes or unmakes a brand, Visit our Trademarks Overview for basic information about U.S. trademark law.
Law, Precedent, and the Clash of Sovereigns
Three points distinguish the Cohiba Cigar Trademark Cancellation from your average office-supply trademark contest. First: the matter of “first use.” In the broad sweep of U.S. trademark law, rights accrue not in the filing of paper but in actual, use of a mark in commerce. Yet, the commercial principle which was so essential to that rule was severed by the embargo, a twist of statutory and foreign-policy consequence. With Cuba locked out, General Cigar claimed the spoils. But the story does not end with the triumph of clever forum shopping.
Second: the Inter-American Convention. Treaties may trump domestic laws. In effect, the federal district court, applying both international treaties and equitable principles, determined that Cuba’s claim prevailed, even without use in U.S. commerce because prior foreign use and treaty rights weighed heavier in the scales of justice.
Third: the importance of political context. From the “Havana Club” rum case to ongoing controversies about “Parmesan” cheese or Champagne, international trademark law is not merely law but geopolitics—interpreted, reinterpreted, and occasionally subverted by embargoes, trade agreements, and inter-agency power struggles. See more on international trademark IP law protection at a older International IP posting.
Commercial Ramifications: The Loss of a Mark
While the chess moves in Washington and Havana may seem remote, the practical effects cascade quickly. The Cohiba Cigar Trademark Cancellation diminishes, perhaps obliterates, General’s investment in building the Cohiba brand in America—a blow not only to its balance sheet but to the company’s place in the pecking order of luxury goods. Traders, distributors, and even retailers face commercial uncertainty. Will new producers vie for the Cohiba name? Will consumers be misled, or will the market adapt with its customary resilience?
For business owners in Kansas City and beyond, the analytic point is this: Trademark “rights of exclusion” are powerful but not absolute. They must be defended with vigilance, audited with care, and reconsidered in the light of shifting laws and international relations. If you possess—or desire—a trademark with international resonance, now is the time to consider an IP Audit.
Hard Lessons and Rhetorical Clarity: What’s at Stake?
Consider the core questions:
1. Does mere registration in the United States guarantee invulnerability?
Certainly not. As witnessed in the Cohiba Cigar Trademark Cancellation case, the regime of treaties, embargoes, and foreign policy may—at any moment—shift the ground beneath your trademark rights.
2. Is “use in commerce” always sufficient?
No. Where embargoes freeze out genuine use, “first use principle” surrenders its determinacy, yielding to treaty obligations or, less palatably, to unforeseen judicial creativity.
3. What about the public and commercial reliance?
The expectations of business owners are important. Yet, as with all property, trademarks remain vulnerable to superior claimants and the rough justice of politics.
See further The IP Center’s Litigation Page for examples of some of our trademark cases.
Practical Counsel for Business Owners
The diligent entrepreneur—no matter how clever—must face the reality that international law is not a dusty afterthought but an ever-present consideration. Herer are some practical suggestions from the learnings of the Cohiba Cigar Trademark Cancellation case:
-
Audit your portfolio: Know where your marks are used, registered, and at risk, both in and outside the United States.
-
Understand treaties: Recognize that global expansion brings global legal exposure; treaties and conventions may override local victories.
-
Act on new risks: Changes in embargoes, courts, or foreign relations demand periodic reviews. Seek advice before launching new products, brands, or expansion plans.
Don’t let legal complexity forestall commercial ambition. For a strategy session, contact The IP Center—Kansas City’s port in the storm of international IP uncertainty.
For the U.S. government’s perspective on international trademark protection and cancellation, visit the USPTO’s international trademark page.
Conclusion
In sum: the Cohiba Cigar Trademark Cancellation decision stands not only as a salute to complexity but also a warning. Law, commerce, and international relations are rarely as distinct as we wish to imagine. The astute Kansas City business, the global incumbent, and the upstart alike must guard against hubris and assume nothing in the realm of rights save that robust counsel, constant vigilance, and legal humility remain virtues, today as ever.
Contact The IP Center today for trademark advice before your brand drifts into peril—or is “blown away by the cruel winds of foreign intrigue and domestic miscalculation.”
Protect your name—lest you learn, as General Cigar did, what it means to lose it.
Internal links guide readers through trademarks, international IP, litigation, and directly to contact one of our attorneys. Governmental wisdom hails from the USPTO.