Acquisition Of Rights

Author(s):  
Annette Kur ◽  
Martin Senftleben

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.

Author(s):  
Ilanah Fhima ◽  
Dev S. Gangjee

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-151
Author(s):  
Andrea Circolo ◽  
Ondrej Hamuľák

Abstract The paper focuses on the very topical issue of conclusion of the membership of the State, namely the United Kingdom, in European integration structures. The ques­tion of termination of membership in European Communities and European Union has not been tackled for a long time in the sources of European law. With the adop­tion of the Treaty of Lisbon (2009), the institute of 'unilateral' withdrawal was intro­duced. It´s worth to say that exit clause was intended as symbolic in its nature, in fact underlining the status of Member States as sovereign entities. That is why this institute is very general and the legal regulation of the exercise of withdrawal contains many gaps. One of them is a question of absolute or relative nature of exiting from integration structures. Today’s “exit clause” (Art. 50 of Treaty on European Union) regulates only the termination of membership in the European Union and is silent on the impact of such a step on membership in the European Atomic Energy Community. The presented paper offers an analysis of different variations of the interpretation and solution of the problem. It´s based on the independent solution thesis and therefore rejects an automa­tism approach. The paper and topic is important and original especially because in the multitude of scholarly writings devoted to Brexit questions, vast majority of them deals with institutional questions, the interpretation of Art. 50 of Treaty on European Union; the constitutional matters at national UK level; future relation between EU and UK and political bargaining behind such as all that. The question of impact on withdrawal on Euratom membership is somehow underrepresented. Present paper attempts to fill this gap and accelerate the scholarly debate on this matter globally, because all consequences of Brexit already have and will definitely give rise to more world-wide effects.


2021 ◽  
pp. 088541222199228
Author(s):  
Eva Purkarthofer ◽  
Kaisa Granqvist

This article analyses the academic concept of “soft spaces” from the perspective of traveling planning ideas. The concept has its origin in the United Kingdom but has also been used in other contexts. Within European Union policy-making, the term soft planning has emerged to describe the processes of cooperation and learning with an unclear relation to planning. In the Nordic countries, soft spaces are viewed as entangled with the logics of statutory planning, posing challenges for policy delivery and regulatory planning systems. This article highlights the conceptual evolution of soft spaces, specifically acknowledging contextual influences and the changing relation with statutory planning.


Author(s):  
Alma-Pierre Bonnet

The decision by the United Kingdom to leave the European Union came as a shock to many. A key player during the referendum campaign was the Vote Leave organisation which managed to convince people that they would be better off outside the European project. Their success was made all the easier as Euroscepticism had been running deep in the country for decades. It is on this fertile ground that Vote Leavers drew to persuade people of the necessity to leave. Using critical metaphor analysis, this paper examines the way Vote Leavers won the argument by developing three political myths, which, once combined, conjured up the notion of British grandeur. Drawing on Jonathan Charteris-Black’s seminal works on the relation between metaphors and the creation of political myths in political rhetoric, this paper posits that the Brexit debate was not won solely on political ground and that the manipulative power of metaphors may have also been a key element. This might explain the current political deadlock, as political solutions might not provide the answers to the questions raised during the campaign.


2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-154
Author(s):  
João Gualberto Marques Porto Júnior

A relação entre o Reino Unido e os países do continente foi marcada ao longo da história por diversos desencontros e disputas. Não foram poucas as guerras travadas entre os britânicos e outras nações europeias. A própria integração europeia inicia-se sem o Reino Unido que apenas na década de 1960 decidiu integrar as comunidades, sendo durante anos impedido pela Franca de Charles de Gaulle. A adesão tardia em 1973 não minimizou as diferenças, tendo novamente havido tensões na década seguinte durante a gestão Margaret Thatcher. As diferenças do casal estranho continuaram após a criação da União Europeia em 1992 e tiveram na decisão do Brexit apenas o desfecho de uma relação distante e tumultuada.ABSTRACTThe relation between the United Kingdom and the countries from "the continent” has been characterized by several disputes and differences along history. A large number of wars were fought between the British and other European nations. Even the European integration started without the United Kingdom, that only decided to take part in the communities in the sixties, being, however, blocked by de Gaulle’s France. Britain’s late accession to the European Communities in 1973 did not reduce the differences with its European neighbors and several tensions emerged during Margaret Thatcher’s government during the eighties. The differences between the odd couple continued after the creation of the European Union in 1992 and the “Brexit” simply represents the natural outcome of a distant and tumultuous relationship.Palavras-chave: Integração europeia, Reino Unido, BrexitKeywords: European integration, United Kingdom, BrexitDOI: 10.12957/rmi.2015.24641Recebido em 08 de Julho de 2016 / Received on July 8, 2016.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document