The ”Pearl” decision by the Federal Supreme Court (BGH) may not be brand new (15 October 2020), but it is interesting in many respects. This post will deal with the similarity of goods. Facts The plaintiff owns an EUTM, registered in 2009, and a German registration, from 2003, for the word PEARL. Both are protected…

Under EU trademark law, a trademark may be revoked if it becomes a misleading indication as to the nature, quality or geographical origin of the goods or services it designates after the date on which it was registered, as a result of the use made of it by its proprietor or with its consent (Art….

The Swedish Patent and Market Court (PMD) ruled out a likelihood of confusion between two figurative trademarks for “ghost” and “GHOST VODKA” based on their mere visual differences. In fact, the Court concluded that the sigs were dissimilar, without even analyzing the signs on a phonetical or conceptual level. A good outcome for the defendants…

Yesterday, 2 July 2020, the European Commission announced that it will refer Romania to the CJEU for not implementing the Trade Mark Directive (Directive (EU) 2015/2436) – see here. While the deadline to transpose the Trade Mark Directive is long overdue – 14 January 2019, Romania is yet to proceed with this, making it the…

  On 30 January 2020, the General Court of the European Union confirmed the Board of Appeal’s decision rejecting the opposition brought by Julius Sämann against the EUTM application for the sign shown above, based (inter alia) on the silhouette of its “magic tree”: (Case no. T-559/19). The Court agreed with the Board of Appeal…

Bad faith is on the rise – whether in reality or as a useful weapon against trade marks is another question. Recently, both the General Court (GC) and the Court of Justice (CJEU) have had several opportunities to consider whether trade marks had been filed in bad faith. The tendency seems to become stricter and…

By the end of June, the US Supreme Court will have ruled on the registrability of scandalous and immoral marks in Iancu (USPTO) v Brunetti (No. 18-302). The case raises the issue of whether, in light of free speech under the First Amendment, a ban on the trademark registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” marks should…

With decision of 15.10.2018 on case T-7/17, the General Court (GC) has clarified an important factor for applicability of Article 8(3) EUTMR, on the prohibition for registration of a trademark filed by an agent or a representative of the trademark owner. However, as the GC’s decision has been appealed (C-809/18 P), we will have to…