Home >  News >  Nintendo Loses Trademark Battle to Costa Rican Supermarket Over Super Mario Name

Nintendo Loses Trademark Battle to Costa Rican Supermarket Over Super Mario Name

by Connor Mar 19,2025

A Costa Rican supermarket, "Súper Mario," has unexpectedly triumphed in a trademark battle against Nintendo. The dispute centered on the supermarket's use of the name, which Nintendo argued infringed on their globally recognized "Super Mario" brand. However, the supermarket successfully defended its trademark by proving the name was a genuine combination of its business type ("súper," meaning supermarket in Spanish) and the first name of its manager, Mario.

The trademark was initially registered in 2013 by Charito, the supermarket owner's son, following his university graduation. Nintendo challenged the trademark's renewal in 2024, citing infringement on their iconic video game character's brand.

Super Mario SupermarketImage: x.com

The supermarket's legal team, led by advisor and accountant Jose Edgardo Jimenez Blanco, effectively countered Nintendo's claim. They argued the name was a straightforward and descriptive reference, not an attempt to capitalize on Nintendo's intellectual property. This argument proved persuasive to the court.

Charito expressed immense relief and gratitude to his legal team, stating, "I am really grateful to my accountant and legal advisor, Jose Edgardo Jimenez Blanco, who managed the registration and following trademark battle. We were considering giving up. How could we ever take on such a massive business entity? But Edgardo and I weren't going to back down, and we got some positive news a few days ago. 'Súper Mario' will never go away."

While Nintendo holds exclusive rights to the "Super Mario" trademark in numerous product categories across many countries (including video games, clothing, and toys), this case underscores the complexities of trademark law. It highlights the challenges faced by even large corporations in protecting their intellectual property when confronted with legitimate, non-infringing uses of similar names by smaller businesses. This unexpected outcome serves as a reminder that even industry giants can face legal setbacks.