General Court clarifies for the first time the scope of protection of plant variety denominations under Article 7(1)(m) of the European Trade Mark Regulation

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. 748-749
Author(s):  
Stefan Martin
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Plant Variety ◽  
European Trade ◽  
First Time ◽  
Scope Of Protection

Abstract Case T-569/18, Kordes' Rose Monique, General Court of the European Union, decision of 18 June 2019, EU:T:2019:421

Distinctiveness of the Marks

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilanah Fhima ◽  
Dev S. Gangjee
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Marks ◽  
Likelihood Of Confusion ◽  
European Trade ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Scope Of Protection ◽  
Practical Level

The role of distinctiveness is perhaps the least understood element of the likelihood of confusion analysis. Obscure in its origins, the idea that the more distinctive a mark is, the more likely confusion should be has been repeatedly accepted by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), but this is also strongly criticised by commentators and UK judges in particular. This chapter seeks to understand the role that distinctiveness plays in the assessment of confusion, explaining how it entered the European trade mark system and critically evaluating its role. On a practical level, this chapter seeks to understand the impact of distinctiveness through examples of levels of distinctiveness that have and have not been accepted to result in enhanced protection, and also to consider how tribunals have dealt with the overlap between distinctiveness for registrablity and likelihood of confusion purposes. However, the chapter ends with a note of warning: although it is possible to find a significant number of cases where distinctiveness is employed to enhance the scope of protection trade marks, in the vast majority of cases, this factor is either not mentioned or deemed irrelevant.

Acquisition Of Rights

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette Kur ◽  
Martin Senftleben
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
Nordic Countries ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Passing Off ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Trade Mark Law ◽  
European Trade

Under European trade mark law, protection is only acquired through registration (Article 6 EUTMR; Article 1 TMD). Whether the mark is actually used or not is of no relevance at this stage: neither is it a requirement for protection, nor does it grant a substantive right under the European Union Trade Mark Regulation (EUTMR) or the Trade Mark Directive (TMD). However, such protection may follow from national law. Member States are free to grant use-based trade mark protection within their jurisdiction, and in a number of them—Austria, Germany, Italy, the Nordic countries, and, in the form of passing off, the United Kingdom—such protection is available under terms that may differ from country to country. The specificities of the legal regime applying to such signs are independent from the provisions in the TMD.

scholarly journals La interferencia entre marcas e indicaciones geográficas en el ámbito vitivinícola

2018 ◽  
pp. 179-197
Author(s):  
Alessia Buggea
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Geographical Area ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
Geographical Indication ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Appellations Of Origin ◽  
European Trade ◽  
Central Argument ◽  
Maximum Protection ◽  
Protected Designations Of Origin

The judgment of the General Court of the European Union (Sixth Chamber), Case T 696/15 of 9 February 2017, against EUIPO examines, among the procedural aspects of the European trade mark regime, non-registration of a wine product in the event of non-compliance with the essential, in particular absolute, requirements for the acquisition of a mark in the territory of the European Union. In examining the various provisions at European level which provide for the granting or denial of trademarks and for the purpose of ensuring that geographical indications are fully effective in the European trade mark registration proceedings, this is to prevent holders from incurring any the grounds for annulment, Regulation Nº 207/2009 on the Community trade mark (hereinafter referred to as the CTMR), 7. 1, (j), points out that they are excluded from the register ‘wine marks containing or consisting of a geographical indication identifying wines, or marks of spirit drinks containing or consisting of a geographical indication identifying the spirits, where such wines or drinks do not have such origin’. The inadmissibility of the application for a word mark which contains a geographical indication which does not belong to it and also coincides with other appellations of origin is, inter alia, the central argument of the judicial issue under consideration. The legal question arose in 2014, when a Spanish mercantile company (Bodegas Vega Sicilia) decided to register the word mark “Tempos Vega Sicilia” before the EUIPO which, however, denied the registration of the same because it the term “Sicilia” is part of the protected designations of origin for wines. Hence, the mercantile company decided to appeal in 2015 to the EU General Court, which rejected the appeal by ruling of 9 February 2017, also rejecting, as the EUIPO did at the time, the arguments of the applicant relating to the existence of a family of registered trade marks prior to the registration of the DO or the potential popularity of said family of trademarks and guaranteeing maximum protection of protected geographical denominations and, therefore, denying registration when, when included in a trademark, it was not limited to the product of the said geographical area.

scholarly journals THE REFORM OF TRADE MARS PROTECTION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND IT’S IMPACT ON LEGISLATION OF UKRAINE

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (127) ◽  
pp. 80-86
Author(s):  
Y. Kapitsa
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Industrial Property ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
License Agreements ◽  
Scope Of Protection ◽  
Collective Marks ◽  
The Eu

The adoption of the EU in 2015 the Directive 2015/2436 and Regulation 2015/2424 resulted in significant changes for the protection of trade marks at the level of the Member States and the EU trade mark. These changes are the result of the policy of the entire approximation of Member States laws in all issues of trademarks, which differs from the harmonization of «minimum rights» and the EU approach to harmonization of legislation on other industrial property objects. Comparison of changes to EU legislation and legislation of Ukraine demonstrates the necessity of making a number of amendments to national legislation regarding registration of scent and other non- traditional marks; clarify the scope of protection of rights; grounds for refusal of registration; concluding license agreements, protection of collective marks etc. It is essential to provide the clarification of the procedure for registration of trademarks in Ukraine to ensure compliance with the registration procedure, established by the Directive 2015/2436.

Rights Granted

2021 ◽  
pp. 133-188
Author(s):  
Gert Würtenberger ◽  
Paul van der Kooij ◽  
Bart Kiewiet ◽  
Martin Ekvad
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
New Member States ◽  
Plant Variety ◽  
Correct Usage ◽  
Essentially Derived Varieties ◽  
Scope Of Protection

This chapter deals with the scope of protection once the material and formal conditions for the granting of Community plant variety rights have been granted. It discusses the scope of rights, the limitation of rights, and the duration and termination of rights. It also highlights the acts to which only the holder of the Community plant variety right is entitled, and the products obtained directly from harvested material. This chapter highlights essentially derived varieties and explains the use of variety denominations, as the holder of the plant variety right is entitled to take action in court against persons who omit the correct usage of such denominations. It talks about the Community plant variety rights that are granted after accession of new Member States to the European Union, which are applied throughout the territories of both the new and old Member States.

The Confusion Test in European Trade Mark Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilanah Fhima ◽  
Dev S. Gangjee
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Systematic Account ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Trade Mark Law ◽  
European Trade

Historically, likelihood of confusion has been the core infringement test for trade mark law, and it remains the most frequently applied test in infringement actions by far. However, there are noticeable differences in how it is applied by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the General Court, and national courts; and questionable outcomes when it is applied in novel situations. This book is the first comprehensive and systematic account of the confusion test within the harmonised European trade mark system. It considers how the test is applied by national trade mark registries across EU member states, by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), by national courts, and by the CJEU. It offers practical guidance, while also evaluating the viability of more recent developments such as initial-interest confusion, post-sale confusion and consumer responses to uses of trade marks on the internet. The book analyses three distinct strata of legal doctrine: the decisions of the CJEU, including the General Court; the extensive body of decisions by EUIPO; and the application of harmonised trade mark law by courts of member states, focusing on leading decisions as well as wayward ones. It also draws upon the legal position in the US to illuminate these issues.

scholarly journals Explaining the European Union’s Changing Position towards the Gibraltar Question after the Brexit Referendum

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (4-1) ◽  
pp. 21-30
Author(s):  
Uğur Burç Yıldız İ ◽  
Anıl Çamyamaç
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
International Law ◽  
Social Constructivism ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Near Future ◽  
First Time

Abstract Having previously remained impartial on the Gibraltar question between Spain and Britain since both were member states, the European Union suddenly changed its position after the Brexit referendum in favor of the Spanish government at the expense of breaching international law. In doing so, the European Union, for the first time, created a foreign policy on the long-standing Gibraltar question. This article explores the reasons behind the creation of this foreign policy in support of Spain. The European Union feared that the idea of Euroscepticism may escalate among remaining member states after the Brexit referendum because of wide-spread claims that it would dissolve in the near future, fuelled by farright political parties. The European Union therefore created a foreign policy regarding Gibraltar in Spain’s favor in order to promote a “sense of community” for thwarting a further rise in Euroscepticism. While making its analysis, the article applies the assumption of social constructivism that ideas shape interests, which then determine the foreign policy choices of actors.

Unmaking Democratic Europe

2020 ◽  
pp. 294-312
Author(s):  
Martin Conway
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
European Union ◽  
Large Degree ◽  
Global Capitalism ◽  
The Other ◽  
Democratic Politics ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Institutional Structures ◽  
Post War ◽  
First Time

This concluding chapter describes how the Europe of the 1990s was for the first time in its history both united and democratic. But the sudden turning point of 1989 lacked something of the global significance of the other European post-war moments of the twentieth century in 1918 and 1945. Europe no longer stood at the centre of its own history, as demonstrated by the ineffective response of the European Union to the violent disintegration of Yugoslavia during the 1990s, and by the divisions that emerged among European states during the American-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In economic terms, too, the ascendancy of a new global capitalism obliged Europe to accept the economic weather generated by more distant or universal forces. In addition, however, Europe had lost confidence in the democratic model that it had developed and, to a large degree, patented. The more fractured and fluid politics that had emerged in Europe by the end of the twentieth century might be more appropriately described as post-democracy: a politics still conducted through the language and institutional structures of democracy, but which lacked much of the former substance of democratic politics.

scholarly journals Co-Circulation of West Nile and Usutu Flaviviruses in Mosquitoes in Slovakia, 2018

Viruses ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viktória Čabanová ◽  
Silvie Šikutová ◽  
Petra Straková ◽  
Oldřich Šebesta ◽  
Bronislava Vichová ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
West Nile Virus ◽  
The European Union ◽  
West Nile ◽  
Usutu Virus ◽  
Pathogenic Viruses ◽  
Lineage 2 ◽  
First Time

Monitoring West Nile virus (WNV) and Usutu virus (USUV) activity now has the highest priority among mosquito-borne pathogenic viruses circulating in the European Union. This study documents a first time detection and the co-circulation of WNV lineage-2 (with the minimal prevalence of 0.46%) and USUV clade Europe 2 (with the minimal prevalence of 0.25%) in mosquitoes from the same habitat of south-western Slovakia and underlines necessity to perform rigorous surveillance in birds, mosquitoes, horses and humans in that country.

scholarly journals An Autonomous EU Functionality Doctrine for Shape Exclusions

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (6) ◽  
pp. 567-577
Author(s):  
Uma Suthersanen ◽  
Marc D Mimler
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Property Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Functionality Doctrine

Abstract Exclusionary subject matter are often underpinned by public interest considerations. In the case of shapes of products, the Court of Justice of the European Union has aligned the interpretation of the relevant exclusionary provisions within design and trade mark laws. More recently, European jurisprudence within copyright law in relation to conditions of protection has imported the same considerations so as to regulate the protection of shapes of products. This article explores the multitude of doctrinal and policy reasons underpinning shape exclusions and argues that the Court is consciously creating an EU autonomous functionality doctrine within intellectual property law. We also argue that the Court is building a European macro-rationale within these laws namely to ensure that protection does not unduly restrict market freedom and competition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document