Before the harmonization of trade mark law in the EU, the legal traditions in the Member States of the European Economic Community were divided into common law systems and civil law systems, with certain differences also prevailing between the latter. In all countries alike, the original objective underlying the protection of commercial signs had been to indicate property of goods offered in the marketplace or to enable national authorities to control the quality, kind, or amount of production. In the age of industrialization, the concept developed into the notion of signs indicating origin of goods stemming from private enterprises, with the accent being placed on different aspects of that concept. In civil law countries, the emphasis lay on indicating that a particular business had ‘ownership’ of a sign. Thus, the legislature saw its foremost task in establishing a secure and transparent system for the acquisition and maintenance of ownership, and offering trade mark owners the legal means necessary for defending the mark against illicit use by unauthorized others. In common law, the accent lay on the prevention of passing off, which was considered a task in the public interest rather than serving private commercial aims. In contrast to continental civil law, creating a public register and admitting private claims against infringement were not tantamount to acknowledging a proprietary right in trade marks. Instead, these measures were taken to efficiently support the public policy objectives underlying trade mark law.
From Brand Performance to Consumer Performativity: Assessing European Trade Mark Law after the Rise of Anthropological Marketing