Refine your search

Content type
Tags
Firm name
Author
Jurisdiction
Language

1,620 results found

Commentary
Ask Lexy

Inlex IP Expertise | France | 13 Jun 2022

Worldwide fame of The Beatles does not automatically extend to BEATLES trademark

The Paris Court of Appeal recently ruled that the reputation of the famous English group The Beatles cannot be automatically extended to the trademark BEATLES. The case demonstrates that it is necessary for owners of reputed trademarks to remain vigilant, since they must demonstrate the acquisition of such reputation for each of the goods and services covered by the trademark registration.
Article
Ask Lexy

Osborne Clarke | European Union, United Kingdom | 24 Jan 2022

High Court provides clarity for brand owners on interpreting Brexit-related legislation

UK courts retain jurisdiction to grant pan-EU injunctions in EU trade mark cases pending at the end of the Brexit transition period The High Court's…
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Pinsent Masons | European Union, United Kingdom | 17 Jan 2022

Passing off: goodwill in "basmati" may extend to other rice products

In Indo European Foods Ltd v EUIPO, the EU General Court gave the EU Intellectual Property Office a lesson in the UK law of "extended passing off" and annulled a Board of Appeal ruling that a UK trader of basmati rice had no case in its opposition under article 8(4) of the EU Trademark Regulation against the applicant for a figurative sign featuring the phrase "Abresham Super Basmati Selaa......
Article
Ask Lexy

Serle Court | European Union, United Kingdom | 17 Dec 2021

easyGroup v Beauty Perfectionists & ors [2021] EWHC 3385 (Ch)

On 17 December 2021, the Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux, handed down judgment in easyGroup v Beauty Perfectionists & Ors [2021] EWHC…
Article
Ask Lexy

Bird & Bird LLP | European Union, Germany | 5 Oct 2021

Down the golden rabbit hole: the latest in German colour trade mark law

Of all the trade mark categories, colour trade marks are some of the more controversial ones. To “monopolise” a colour immediately raises…
Commentary
Ask Lexy

GRAF ISOLA Rechtsanwälte GmbH | European Union | 6 Sep 2021

General Court rules on registrability of sound mark submitted as audio file for first time

The General Court recently declared that the sound of a drinks can that is opened, followed by a short silence and a fizzing sound, cannot be registered as an EU trademark (EUTM) because of lack of distinctiveness. This first decision of the General Court on sound marks submitted in an audio format gives helpful guidelines for assessing the requirements regarding distinctiveness that sound......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Grünecker | European Union, Germany | 16 Aug 2021

Lindt and famous gold bunny win again

For almost 20 years, the Lindt gold bunny has been occupying the German and European courts. Recently, Lindt sought to derive rights from a non-registered trademark for its golden colour acquired through use in Germany, which was confirmed by the Federal Court of Justice. This decision is remarkable because it is already difficult to establish the existence of a trademark acquired by use with......
Article
Ask Lexy

bureau Brandeis | European Union, Netherlands | 13 Aug 2021

Famous faces: the portrait as a trademark

In May, the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO decided that the portrait photographs of two Dutch models, Yasmin Wijnaldum and Rozanne Verduin, can be…
Commentary
Ask Lexy

GEVERS | European Union | 2 Aug 2021

Registering slogans in European Union can be challenging

The General Court has stated that it is inappropriate to apply criteria to slogans that are stricter than those applicable to other types of sign. Nevertheless, many applicants still face an uphill battle when trying to register slogans as trademarks. This is likely because slogans are often considered as being purely laudatory advertising. A recent case shows that while slogans may face a......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

GRAF ISOLA Rechtsanwälte GmbH | Austria | 2 Aug 2021

Revocation of EUTM for misleading public

The Supreme Court recently issued its first decision concerning the revocation of a trademark for misleading the public. Since there is little case law relating to article 58(1)(c) of the EU Trademark Regulation, the decision is a welcome clarification of the prerequisites for this ground of revocation.
Previous page 1 2 3 ...