The mere fact that there are multiple trade mark registrations within the EU including the word ‘seven’ or number ‘7’ is not sufficient to establish the weak distinctive character of those marks.
"48. Furthermore, the mere existence, even in high numbers, of marks which have that characteristic is not sufficient to establish the weak distinctive character of those marks."
The General Court correctly held that the word ‘seven’ in the contested mark was the dominant element, and that the presence of the words ‘for all mankind’ does not affect the visual, aural and conceptual similarity between the word element “seven” and the earlier figurative mark “SEVEN”.
"108. In that regard, the General Court, while recognising the particular character of the additional words at issue, found that the presence of the word ‘seven’ at the beginning of the signs at issue overrides the additional words. Thus they were considered by the General Court as not likely to erase the impression created by the word ‘seven’ in the mind of the relevant public.
113. The General Court noted, at paragraphs 42 and 45 of the judgment under appeal, that those two particular aspects are not sufficient of themselves to dispel the phonetic similarity created by the element common to both marks, or to give the trade mark for which registration is sought a conceptual content that is sufficiently different from that of the earlier marks."
Likelihood of confusion is therefore assumed, since it is not disputed that the relevant goods are identical or highly similar.
"114. Thus the mere recognition of the ‘remarkable’ and ‘philosophical’ aspects in that mark cannot preclude the conclusion that, owing to the presence of the word ‘seven’, there is an overall similarity between the signs at issue and, as a result, a likelihood of confusion between them.
115. It must be noted in this respect that, like the findings relating to the visual similarity between the signs at issue, mentioned at paragraphs 101 to 104 of this judgment, the findings relating to the phonetic and conceptual aspects of those signs are based on an analysis of all relevant factors and are consistent with the assessments which the General Court must carry out, as pointed out at paragraph 70 of this judgment."
IPPT20130221, CJEU, Seven for all Mankind v Seven
C-655/11 P - ECLI:EU:C:2013:94
