Hot spot details

Eu General Court vs "GOURMET" The modified use of the ruling

2023-06-14

3 month, The General Court of the European Union has ruled in an interesting case on proof of use, This means that the owner of a registered trademark may need to prove that 5 Used prior trademarks on related goods and services during the year.

B2B tradesman Transgourmet Ibérica, SAU (applicant) Yeah, German supermarket chain Aldi the "GOURMET" Eu graphic trademark (The trademark registration number is 8143653) An application for invalidation was filed. The application is based on the applicant's prior trademark.

In the program, Transgourmet Companies are required to submit proof of use of their prior trademarks, because Aldi The company claims that the prior trademark was in the past 5 Not used in the middle of the year. The success of an invalid application depends on whether the prior trademark owner can prove that in the past 5 Did use the trademark in mid-year.

Transgourmet The company showed "GOURMET" Different uses of the word, The text incorporates some visual elements, Like the chef's hat and red frame. In the present case, European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) Both the Appeal Board and the revocation Department reached their conclusions, Transgourmet These uses change the distinctive character of the trademark, Therefore, the invalid claim was rejected. They think, There is no evidence that the trademark has been registered before 5 Used during the year. According to the Appeals Board, "The true use of a trademark cannot be proved by probability or conjecture, It must be proved by reliable and objective evidence and sufficient use of the mark in the relevant market" .

For the appeals board, The prior sign was indeed used, But in a different form than the one in which it was originally registered.

So the question is, Whether using the mark in a different way than when it was originally registered means that its use cannot be proven, Because the use is not the same as the form of registration.

however, The General Court of the European Union holds that, These elements (Chef's hat and red frame) Does not imply a material change in registration.

According to the General Court, The public will care about named elements, Because it is dominant relative to the graphic element, Chef's hat is not dominant because of its small size, The red frame is a decorative element. In addition, These elements haven't changed "GOURMET" The reading order of the word, Semantic content and speech. therefore, The court held that Transgourmet The trademark is indeed in Aldi preapplication 5 It was put into use during the year. This means that the court overruled the commission's decision.

The case is a reminder of the importance of trademark use, Because not using it could be detrimental to law enforcement, Even lead to the loss of rights. When using a trademark, Also beware of use that deviates significantly from the form of registration. As you can see from this case, The use of a modified version of a trademark may not necessarily be considered an appropriate use of a registered mark. (Be compiled from intellectual-property-helpdesk. ec. europa. eu)

TRANSLATORS: Rason group　proofread: Liu Peng

　　disclaimer: This network reprint or compile the original articles are from the network, Does not represent the views of this website or confirm the authenticity of its content. If the source is mislabeled or the copyright of the article is involved, Please contact us, This website will be corrected in due course, delete, thank you.

Trademark infringement rights protection

Expand more