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.
 
  MONDAY, 31 OCTOBER 2011
OHIM Boards of Appeal rejects another slogan

Dr. August Oetker Nahrungsmittel KG filed a CTM application for the words La qualité est la meilleure des recettes to cover goods in Class 29, 30 and 32.

The registration had been refused because of lack of distinctive character in respect to all the goods for which the registration was sought.

Dr. Oetker appealed the decision, but the Board observed that the relevant consumers, in this case, the French speaking consumers, would understand and perceive this grammatically correct sentence merely as a promotional statement about the positive qualities of the interested goods.

«Recettes» is a common word and describes the ingredients and the procedure to obtain a particular income; in a general way is synonymous of “method”.

Therefore, according to the Boards, “La qualité est la meilleure des recettes” communicates that the products at issue are produced with methods that guarantee a high quality.

The relevant public would perceive this statement as promotional, and not as a sing that indicate the origin of the goods, distinguishing them from the goods of another enterprise.

Once again, as already done in 2010 confirming the decision of refusal of registration of another slogan “Smart for Life Cookie Diet” (Case R 0211/2010-1), the Court of Appeal took the chance to give its interpretation of the judgment of the Court of Justice in the case C-398/08 (“Vorsprung durch technique”).

In that case, Audi had applied to register the word mark “Vorsprung durch technique” for a wide range of goods and services including ‘vehicles and apparatus for locomotion by land’ in Class 12. The Board of Appeal had refused registration on the basis that the mark lacked distinctive character for all goods and services except the goods in Class 12, as the mark had acquired distinctive character in respect of these goods. The General Court had dismissed Audi’s appeal. Audi had appealed to the European Court of Justice, which annulled the decision.

The ECJ noted that the public’s perception of different categories of marks was not necessarily the same, and that it could therefore be more difficult to establish distinctiveness in relation to marks of certain categories, such as advertising slogans. However, difficulties in establishing distinctiveness in relation to advertising slogans did not justify criteria stricter than those applicable to other types of mark.

The ECJ judged that the mark could be perceived by the relevant public both as an advertising slogan and as an indication of origin of the goods or services. The fact that the mark was primarily understood as an advertising slogan had no bearing on its distinctive character.

The Board of Appeal observes that “the Court’s statements in ‘Vorsprung durch Technik’ have not changed the criteria in relation to verbal expressions serving as promotional or advertising messages. Although that judgment indeed clarifies certain questions relating to the acceptability of trade marks, it cannot and should not be read as suggesting that any promotional phrase, however descriptive or banal, can now be registered as a trade mark, merely because it is presented in the form of an advertising message.“

In the case of Audi, the slogan was widely known because it had been used for many years for motor vehicles, and could be considered inherently distinctive in relation to the other goods and services not connected to motor vehicles.

In the case of “La qualité est la meilleure des recettes”, the slogan did not acquire distinctiveness trough use, and its general meaning in respect to the goods which it aimed to cover (food, non alcoholic beverages and already process foods and beverage) would have been perceived as a mere promotional statement, which does not indicate the origin of the goods.

Posted by: Benedetta Cordovado @ 21.50 
Tags: OHIM Boards of Appeal, slogan,

 

   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
3275 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
515 readers now receive the Class 46 weblog via an RSS reader.

Subscribe in a reader


The Class 46 archive


+ 2013
+ 2012
- 2011
     + December (24)
     + November (41)
     - October (42)
OHIM Boards of Appeal rejects another slogan
Germany: Is "Proti" the German bridge to "Bainbridge" ?
General Court: Back in the U.S.S.R
Darjeeling gets its legal protection -- in stages
Poland: platan v. platanus
DPMA: trade mark filing trends in 2011
BUNGA BUNGA
General Court: All for SEVEN- SEVEN FOR ALL MANKIND
November ETMR now published
OHIM's new mediation service: in force since 24 October 2011
General Court: who can see more clearly now?
Trade Mark of the Day
Poland: food labelling
Poland: well-known trade marks
La Sonrisa de Carmen y Bloom Clothes v OHMI
Freixenet, SA v OHIM: Salut! Txin txin!
Germany: Feierbiest
UKIPO issues TPN (3/2011) - hearings in cases of invalidation on relative grounds
General Court: LOOPIA v LOOP, LOOPY
Germany: I might be moved by a movie but IMOVIE is not iMOVE
MARQUES events: coming to a country near you?
General Court: Rosalia v Rosalia de Castro
Trade Mark of the day
General Court: NC NICKOL v NIKE
OHIM: EuroClass replacing EuroAce and EuroNice classification tools
MARQUES seminar on first big RCD ruling
General Court: NAVI v NaViKey
General Court: PIPELINE and absolute grounds
Poland: sunflowers and the Sun
Portugal: Implementation of Project Seniority
Nike in General court: DYNAMIC SUPPORT and VICTORY RED
Spain - Happy Pills, S.L. will be even happier (and will continue using a pink cross to sell candies).
Germany: Bavarian Beer battle still raging ...
Germany: once again the law of people sharing the same name" ("Recht der Gleichnamigen")
two stripes, three stripes and OUT
Portugal: IMUNID vs. IMMUNIQ
Poland: it is all about the reputation
Valencia court takes jurisdiction over fakes in transit
Paki Logistics' appeal rejected in General Court
The King is Not dead, all hail the King
Ara v OHMI - Allrounder
Poland: a letter of consent and something more
     + September (51)
     + August (27)
     + July (39)
     + June (37)
     + May (47)
     + April (35)
     + March (48)
     + February (32)
     + January (43)
+ 2010
+ 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