IPPT20110705, CJEU, Edwin v OHIM

Print this page 15-07-2011

TRADEMARK LAW

 

Invalid trade mark Elio Fiorucci because of an earlier “right to a name”, broad interpretation:

• As regards the wording of that provision, it should be noted that the words ‘right to a name’ do not provide any support for the restrictive interpre-tation proposed by the appellant, to the effect that the provision concerns only that right as an attrib-ute of personality and does not cover commercial exploitation of a name.

 

IPPT20110616, CJEU, Union Investment Privatfonds v UniCredito

Print this page 21-06-2011

TRADEMARK LAW

 

Admissibility; likelihood of confusion
• Issue of fact, but failure to take all factors relevant to the case into account constitutes an error of law

 

Uni serial marks
• Judgment of General Court on lack of association between the trade marks applied for with the earlier series of UNI-marks and likelihood of confusion insufficiently examined and substantiated

 

IPPT20110616, CJEU, Thuiskopie v Opus

Print this page 19-06-2011

COPYRIGHT & RELATED RIGHTS

 

IPPT20110609, CJEU, Alter Channel

Print this page 16-06-2011

ADVERTISING LAW

 

Surreptitious advertising: intended by broadcaster to serve advertising’.
• that the provision of payment or of consideration of another kind is not a necessary condition for establishing the element of intent in surreptitious advertising


IPPT20110609, CJEU, Alter Channel

 

IPPT20091120, NLSC, Lego v Mega Brands

Print this page 25-05-2011

SLAVISH IMITATION

 

Dutch Supreme Court

 

Standardization and slavish imitation
• Under circumstances a need for standardization among the buyers of the products can, however, lead to justification for the imitation of a product that causes confusion
• Other considerations for purchase do not affect the justification of the imitation, both in view of the compatibility and the exchangeability

IPPT20110512, CJEU, Konsumentombudsman v Ving

Print this page 24-05-2011

UNFAIR COMMERCIAL PRACTICES

 

IPPT20110505, CJEU, Novo Nordisk v Ravimiamet

Print this page 12-05-2011

ADVERTISING LAW

 

IPPT20110505, CJEU, MSD v Merckle

Print this page 12-05-2011

ADVERTISING LAW

 

Advertising for medicinal products:
• Not prohibited:  faithful reproduction of packag-ing and leaflet information.
• Prohibited: selected or rewritten information since such manipulation of information can be ex-plained only by an advertising purpose

IPPT20110505, CJEU, MSD v Merckle

Pages