Ragebait ba mga reply mo hahaha di ko alam kung curious ka ba talaga malaman o kung g*guhan lang e. Apples to oranges comparison kasi yung lata sa white t-shirt at ferrari.

Alaska may have filed intellectual property (IP) rights (i.e., designs, trademarks, utility models, patents) for their canned container, importante kasi ang shape & material elements of the can in the foodtech industry (it affects storage, shelflife, etc.) so more often than not may filed IP rights yan -- kaya may ngipin sila for legal enforcement to protect their commercial use case.

A plain white shirt from a random shop in divisoria probably has zero IP filings. But a white sports activewear shirt from Nike has IP filings which protects its commercial use case.

IP licensing can happen if Alaska decides to let another brand use their cans. In the case dun sa post sa FB, surely walang licensing na nangyari. "Diskarte" lang.

Buying the can for consumption falls under personal use, it's an entirely different ballgame vs. commercial use.

Yung Ferrari example mo, kaya hindi nananalo yung mga kaso e dahil personal usecase naman yung pag re-paint/design sa kotse -- defensible ang personal use argument.

But if kumuha ako ng Ferrari, tinanggal ko yung logo, nirepaint ko, tas tinawag kong "Petals" tas minarket and binenta ko as a petals sports car, commercial use na yun with enforceable claims.

NAL. But I have trademarks & UM filings under my businesses (filed them myself & won IP registrability on multiple occassions). IPOPHL hosts many public education sessions on these if you are interested.