Puma´s earlier mark Applicant´s mark By judgment of 28 June 2018 (C‑564/16 P), the CJEU rejected an appeal filed by the EUIPO. The case was, in essence, about whether and to which extent the EUIPO could or even had to take into account its own previous decision practice, including findings of fact…
In a recent Notice to Stakeholders, the European Commission has highlighted a possible outcome for customs and enforcement, following the British exit from the EU. Whilst this is subject to transitional provisions and the withdrawal agreement at large, it serves to reiterate the cliff edge which may conceivably be presented to UK based brand owners…
A federal district court’s award of attorney fees under the Lanham Act and Utah’s Truth in Advertising Act (UTIAA) to a defendant following the parties’ stipulation of dismissal has been vacated and the case remanded by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver. The defendant was not a prevailing party entitled to attorney fees under…
Already in 2009, the Austrian Supreme Court granted an injunction against a pumpkin seed farmer from the Austrian province of Styria, who had had the ingenuous idea to “parody” Pfizer’s famous VIAGRA brand by selling pumpkin seeds in a blue sugar coating under the name “STYRIAGRA”, and registering that name as trademark. Unsurprisingly, Pfizer didn’t…
The General Court (in Case T-1/17) was, as it found the sign (IR 5510921) (hereafter LA MAFIA SE SIENTA A LA MESA) (in English: ‘The mafia is seated at the table’) contrary to public policy within the meaning of Article 7(1)(f) EUTMR. The sign was applied for and registered for goods/services in Classes 25, 35,…
Substantial evidence supported the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that the mark “AQUAPEL” and design for leather and imitation leather hides, furniture covers, and various home goods was confusingly similar to the mark “AQUAPEL,” registered in standard characters, for different types of home goods, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has…
In a recent decision (Cartier International AGand others (Respondents) v British Telecommunications Plc and another(Appellants) [2018] UKSC 28), the UK Supreme Court has ruled that brand owners must pay Internet Service Providers’ (ISPs) costs for implementing website blocking injunctions. This is a reversal of the previous Court of Appeal decision, and whilst these blocking orders…
The wordings of Article 7(1)(f) EUTMR (for ease of reference: ‘trade marks which is contry to public policy or to accepted principles of moral’) and the Danish equivalent – Section 14(1)(1) of the Danish Consolidate Trade Marks Act – are very broad and allow much room for interpretation. A judicious application of this provision necessarily…
The Fourth Board of Appeal (BoA) of the EUIPO has once again been told off by the General Court (GC). In its decision of 6 June 2018 (case T-803/16), the GC decided that the BoA was not competent to rule upon the question of genuine use of its own motion in inter partes proceedings if…
The General Court annulled a decision by the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO, based on an insufficient (or, rather, inexistent) assessment of the reputation claimed by the opponent (GC, 1 June 2018, T‑900/16, only available in Spanish and French). The case concerned largely identical marks– DAYADAY in slightly different stylization – on both sides…
