> If you asked me to describe it from the first picture, I might say, “It’s a picture of a monster in front of an Ikea store,”
Well I wouldn't.
> since it looks super obvious like it is supposed to be an Ikea store
It's supposed to be similar. But trademark isn't an issue unless there's real potential for confusion, and a single glance at a photo where the building is 80% blocked doesn't count.
When someone has a pear phone, it's obvious what that compares to, and it's also obvious that it's not the same brand.
