Accueil / Distinctiveness

PARTAGER

New step for “numerals” as trademarks?

We previously reported the decision of the European Court of First Instance which on November 19, 2009, denied registration to a couple of Community trademark applications for the numerals 150, 250, 350, 222, 333 and 555 (for “periodicals, books, games brochures” in class 16), 1000 (for “brochures, periodicals containing crossword puzzles and rebus puzzles, newspapers”…

Lire la suite
PARTAGER

Single letters get OHIM’s favor?

The Second Board of Appeal of the OHIM has decided in Case R-1088/2010-2 that the mark consisting in the single letter ‘W’ (not really stylized as it was rather close of a word mark – the picture below is not the mark in concerns) should be allowed registration in respect of ‘transport; packaging and storage…

Lire la suite
PARTAGER

Want a chocolate (as trademark)?

Chocolate truly are part of the Christmas period…. even at the OHIM! Four decisions have been issued by the General Court on December 17, 2010 in cases T-336/08, T-337/08 T-346/08 and T-395-08 about the Lindt bunny displayed in gold and red colours, a shape of the reindeer, a red dibbon and the cholcolate bunny shape…

Lire la suite
PARTAGER

Distinctiveness of LVMH clasp

Just published is a decision issued on April 9, 2010, by the Paris Court of Instance which upheld the registered mark of LVMH for the clasp shown below to be distinctive. For the Court, that shape is not imposed by the function of the articles it applies to. It even can refer to the V…

Lire la suite
PARTAGER

Distinctiveness of bottle surfaces under OHIM standards

The General Court has confirmed in cases T-109/08 and T-110/08 that no registration should be granted to trademarks consisting in the specific aspects of wine bottles because they lacked distinctiveness and were not evidenced as having acquired distinctiveness though use. Spanish company Frexeinet SA had filed for ‘sparkling wines’ in class 33 the trademarks below…

Lire la suite