Login | Join Us | Contact Us | Search
 
 
 

 
 
  About Us   Press         Conferences   Members   Teams       Publications   Class 46     Position Papers   FAQs        Links     

Class 46 - for your European trade mark news
 

Now in its sixth year, Class 46  is dedicated to European trade mark law and practice.  This weblog is written by a team of enthusiasts who want to spread the word and share their thoughts with others.
 
  FRIDAY, 16 JULY 2010
Spain - Where is the distinctivity in mixed trade marks? The Spanish CTM Court no. 1 has an answer to that.

One of the recurrent topics in trade mark litigation (specially in cancellation actions on the grounds of lack of use and infringement cases) is where resides the distinctivity in mixed marks. Those type of registrations were defined by the Court of Justice of the European Communities in the case C-488/06 P as those "comprising both graphic and word elements".

It is not uncommon that trade mark owners vary the representation of their registered mixed marks in trade but, what are the acceptable limits to that?

A recent Judgment of the Spanish CTM Court no. 1 tackles this issue. In that specific case, the respondent based its defence (amongst other arguments) in the fact that the claimant's mixed marks were not used in trade "as registered", as it used in trade another chromatic variation different to the one it registered.

The CTM as stake (no. 001823608) had this specific appearance:

The Court ruled that in that specific case, the "strength" (literal) of the claimant's mixed mark resided in its word element, that was "nuclear" to its distintinctive aptitude. The defence based on the lack of use was therefore dismissed as the claimant met its burden of proof when it provided documents that demonstrated that the word element of the mark ("Areas" was used in a "constant and real" way by the claimant.

Posted by: Ignacio Marques @ 13.37 
Tags: Spain, mixed marks, infringement.,

 

   0 comments:    Post a comment

 
 

Search Class 46
Search:

Who we all are...

Birgit Clark
Edith Van den Eede
Fidel Porcuna
Frédéric Glaize
Gino Van Roeyen
Jeremy Phillips
Kathrin Vowinckel
Laetitia Lagarde
Mark Schweizer
Markku Tuominen
Niamh Hall
Nikos Prentoulis
Pedro Malaquias
Robert Börner
Tomasz Rychlicki

Receive Class 46 by email
3352 readers now receive the Class 46 weblog by email circular. Why don't you?

To subscribe, just type your email address in the box below, then click the 'Subscribe' button.
email:

Receive Class 46 by RSS Feed
523 readers now receive the Class 46 weblog via an RSS reader.

Subscribe in a reader


The Class 46 archive


+ 2013
+ 2012
+ 2011
- 2010
     + December (50)
     + November (47)
     + October (40)
     + September (46)
     + August (30)
     - July (55)
Poland: one cross for all scouts
Christian Louboutin: there is no business like (fake) shoe business
Butter: not that unique
Pigs and protection: Old Spots get the TSG treatment
Poland: observations, oppositions, invalidations - who's the party?
A brief update on Paul
German Federal Patent Court: ALLFAcolor v ALPHA
Spain reduces penal sanctions in the hope of more condemnatory orders
Finland: Conflict between trademark and name of a rock band
Spain - Fighting the pirates. Year 2009 in numbers.
Buffalo by-product goes all the 'whey' to protection
Octopus Paul still in the news... and two more Paul trade marks
Detailed affidavit by employee of applicant may be sufficient to prove genuine use
Using Google Similar Images search to find infringing logos
Sprider catches infringer in a temporary web
Customs union poses fresh threats along with opportunities
More Octopus Paul trade marks
The BGH and the story of the lost golden Easter bunny
Poland: secondary meaning and distinctiveness
Bakers to Aldi: you're not baking
Three more GIs for Italy
New .pt rules now in force
Spain - Where is the distinctivity in mixed trade marks? The Spanish CTM Court no. 1 has an answer to that.
E-justice website launched
Octopus Paul trade marks
Poland: dissimilarity of 3D trade marks
(Non-) British brands
Use of PARMETTA for a Seasoning Infringes PDO PARMIGIANO REGGIANO
Use of PARMETTA for a Seasoning Infringes PDO PARMIGIANO REGGIANO
AdWords: French Supreme Court remits Google v Vuitton case to the appeal court
Finland: Customs seized batch of watches worth 12 million euros
Latest GI Regs cover basil, beans and honey
Poland: big advertising and personal rights
The aura of luxury
Finland: The Board of Appeal taking strict line with surname trade marks
First Thai agricultural product on its way to get PGI status.
WIPO launches interactive map of Appellations of Origin registered under the Lisbon system
New Ferrari logo without the debated bar code design
Peter weathers the peerstorm
AirPlus/A+ dispute heads for ultimate appeal
Portakabin ruling: the Court of Justice rules
Arbitration ruling on the transfer of the PUMA trade marks in Spain
Montes de Toledo PDO amended
ITMA, Nottingham Law School offer new skills-base course
Priority in filing: does every minute count?
A pig's ear: Soprèssa Vicentina PDO spec amended
Italy signs up for Singapore
Switzerland: ALTEC LANSING is heard
Ireland opts to retain relative grounds examinations
Poland: strong, weak, distinctive trade marks for alcohol products
Bundespatentgericht: Speicherstadt
Product placement: the new reality gets nearer
The Zappanale goes on!
Switzerland: CAPRI is misleading geographic indication for tobacco
German Federal Patent Court : "Schusswaffe"
     + June (40)
     + May (33)
     + April (42)
     + March (62)
     + February (44)
     + January (36)
+ 2009
+ 2008
+ 2007

 
 

Terms of Use: The material included on this site is provided for information purposes only, and we make no representations or warranties as to its accuracy. It does not represent legal advice. Before relying on this material, you should take care to verify its accuracy, taking professional advice as appropriate. [Please click here for the full Terms and Conditions of Use]

Copyright ©2008-2013 MARQUES Ltd and Individual Contributors