Vehicles from the Netherlands - Full Crash -

Vehicles from the Netherlands - Full Crash -




 More comments on the Fotokonvult

  
 More comments on the Fotokonvult


 More comments on the Fotokonvult


 More comments on the Fotokonvult


 More comments on the Fotokonvult


 More comments on the Fotokonvult


    More comments on the Fotokonvult


  More comments on the Fotokonvult


 More comments on the Fotokonvult


  More comments on the Fotokonvult



BGH: Traffic enforcement of a brand from 50% 

(BGH, judgment v 9.7.2015, Az. I ZB 65/13 - Nivea-Blau)


The Federal Court of Justice today repealed the decision of the Federal Patent Court of 19 March 2013 to delete the Farbmarke Nivea-Blau and referred it back to the Federal Patent Court. Although abstract color marks are generally not distinguishable, and therefore, i.d.R. Not eligible for registration. Moreover, the blue in the affected segment is used as a reference to products for night care or as a reference to a particular target group (men) and is therefore to be kept free.However, according to the BGH, it is not excluded that the concrete Nivea-Blau has passed through the color mark for the goods in question. Sufficient for traffic enforcement is also in an abstract color mark that more than 50% of the audience in the color see a product indicator. The requirements of the Federal Patent Court (75% traffic enforcement) are therefore too high; Moreover, the opinion research submitted by the proprietor of the trade mark was not appropriate to determine the degree of traffic enforcement.Federal Court of Justice, communication from press office 112/2015 from 09.07.2015Bundesgerichtshof decides to delete the Nivea-Blau color markDecision of 9 July 2015 - I ZB 65/13 - Nivea-BlauThe I. Zivilamt of the Federal Court of Justice, which was responsible for trademark law, among other things, today decided to delete the color mark "Blau (Pantone 280 C)" from Beiersdorf in the trademark register of the German Patent and Trademark Office.The brand is registered for "body care and beauty care products, namely skin and body care products" due to the use of transport. The Federal Patent Court has ordered the deletion of the trademark upon application by a competitor of the trademark owner.The Bundesgerichtshof dismissed the decision of the Federal Patent Court on the legal complaint of the trademark owner and remitted the case to the new trial and decision to the Federal Patent Court.

 The Federal Court of Justice has ruled that the absolute protection barriers of § 8 para. 2 no. 1 and 2 MarkenG * exist. Abstract color marks are generally not distinctive and therefore can not be registered according to § 8 (2) no. 1 Markengesetz, because the traffic addressed perceives a color regularly as a decorative element and not as a product label. There were no special circumstances justifying a different assessment. Furthermore, according to Article 8 (2) (2) of the Markengesetz, the color mark can not be registered because it is used in the affected product segment as a reference to products for night care or as a reference to a specific target group, namely skin and personal care products for men; Is therefore required.However, in the light of the findings made so far by the Federal Patent Court, the Bundesgerichtshof does not rule out the possibility that the color mark for the goods in question has been enforced in traffic within the meaning of section 8 (3) of the Markengesetz ** and can not therefore be deleted. Sufficient for traffic enforcement is also an abstract color mark that more than 50% of the audience in the color see a product indicator. On the other hand, the Federal Patent Court had made much greater demands on the acquisition of distinctiveness by means of traffic enforcement in the case of a contine-free color mark, and it was assumed that at least 75% of the general public should be aware of a particular company in the color blue in the product area of ​​the skin and personal care products. The Bundesgerichtshof has criticized this criterion as too strict. The Federal Patent Court will now have to ask for opinions on the prerequisites for the enforcement of transport. The final decision can not be based solely on the traffic reports already submitted by the trade mark owner. This demoscopic examination is generally based on "skin and body care products", without further differentiation according to the individual product groups within the large product range comprising products of a very different product. However, according to the Bundesgerichtshof, such a differentiation according to certain product segments within the scope of the "skin and body care products" is necessary.Furthermore, the results of the opinion research submitted by the trade mark owner are not sufficiently reliable. The test persons would have had to submit a color card with the blue color at the survey. Instead the test persons have been shown a blue color chart with white border. This may have influenced the results of the opinion research submitted by the brand owner in their favor, since the product design of the brand owner often has a combination of the colors blue and white, for example, with the well-known Nivea cream in the blue can with white inscription.Federal Patent Court, Order of 19 March 2013 - 24 W (pat) 75/10, GRUR 2014, 185Karlsruhe, 9 July 2015

No comments: