Sign In Remember me
Username:  
Password:
 

  Polish Sejm wants new logo...      Changes to OHIM's Manual of Trade Mark Practice: usually no similarity between restaurant services and drinks...      Genuine use in one Member State: the HPO speaks out...      The Transformers take over the General Court: ENERCON confusingly similar to TRANSFORMERS ENERGON...      The "ONEL case" - more rumours...      Poland: information on licensing for Euro 2012 trade marks...      Worst UDRP decision of 2009?...      G-Star successful in Italy as Milan Court upholds protection for 'Elwood' and ‘Limit Regular’ jeans....      The mother of all UDRP complaints?...      Poland: GESTROL is not always similar to GESTROLTEX...     
 
My Account Join Us Members Conferences Teams Publications Class 46 Case Notes FAQs Contact Us

Class 46 - for your European trade mark news
 

Now in its second 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, 13 NOVEMBER 2009
Poland: can real food serve as a trade mark?
The Polish company PRAWDZIWE JEDZENIE Sp. z o.o. from Nowy Sącz applied to register word trade mark PRAWDZIWE JEDZENIE Z-313084 in class 29 for goods such as: foodstuffs of animal origin, as well as vegetables and other horticultural products suitable for consumption or preservation, especially meat, fish, poultry, meats, canned mushrooms, cheese, milk, cream, butter, eggs, milk beverages with milk predominating, marmalades, in class 30 for goods such as: foodstuff of vegetable origin intended for consumption or preservation, especially bread, cereal, pastry and confectionery, honey and in class31 for goods such as: unprocessed agricultural products in particular: fresh fruits and vegetables, mushrooms, forest products.

In a decision of 27 February 2008, The Polish Patent Office refused to grant the right of protection for PRAWDZIWE JEDZENIE trade mark due to its lack of sufficient distinctive character referring to all the goods.  The PPO found that the sign PRAWDZIWE JEDZENIE (REAL FOOD) is so common that recognizing it as a trade mark for particular goods is not possible. The PPO ruled that the registration would be contrary to provisions included in article 129(2)(ii) of the Polish Act of 30 June 2000 on Industrial Property Law - IPL - (in Polish: ustawa Prawo własności przemysłowej) of 30 June 2000, published in Dziennik Ustaw (Journal of Laws) of 2001 No 49, pos. 508, consolidated text on 13 June 2003, Dziennik Ustaw No 119, pos. 1117, with later amendments:
2. Subject to Article 130, the following shall be considered as being devoid of sufficient distinctive character:
(ii) signs which consist exclusively or mainly of elements which may serve, in trade, to designate the kind, origin, quality, quantity, value, intended purpose, manufacturing process, composition, function or usefulness of the goods,
On December 2009, after rehearing the case, the Polish Patent Office uphold its arguments in whole. The PPO also cited the CFI's judgment in case T-127/02, Concept v. OHMI (ECA).

Prawdziwe Jedzenie Company filed a complaint to the District Administrative Court in Warsaw.

The DAC in its judgment of 20 May 2009, case act signature VI SA/Wa 243/09 held that:
The distinctiveness of each trade mark is assessed individually, based on the applicable legal norms and the issue of whether it concerns a pure word mark or a figurative trade mark with a dominant graphics cannot be bypassed, especially if the protection is expected to be granted to words of informational nature.

Legal norms included in article 129(2)(ii) of the IPL prevent situations of depriving the competitors from informing the buyers about the character of goods, by the exclusive use of a registred trade mark. Granting the right of protection to information which serve as a trade mark about a quality of food product, its taste or qualities would lead to ensure a monopoly, or granting the exclusive use of it to only one entrepreneur.

The judgment is not final yet.

Posted by: Tomasz Rychlicki @ 17.23 
Tags:

 

   0 comments:    Post a comment

 
 

Search Class 46
Search:

Who we all are...

Birgit Clark
Daniella Ampollini
Edith Van den Eede
Frédéric Glaize
Gino Van Roeyen
Ignacio Marques
Janne Britt Hansen
Jeremy Phillips
Mark Schweizer
Mikael Kolehmainen
Nikos Prentoulis
Sasha Yelnik
Tomasz Rychlicki

Receive Class 46 by email
974 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
332 readers now receive the Class 46 weblog via an RSS reader.

Subscribe in a reader


The Class 46 archive


- 2010
     - February (10)
Polish Sejm wants new logo
Changes to OHIM's Manual of Trade Mark Practice: usually no similarity between restaurant services and drinks
Genuine use in one Member State: the HPO speaks out
The Transformers take over the General Court: ENERCON confusingly similar to TRANSFORMERS ENERGON
The "ONEL case" - more rumours
Poland: information on licensing for Euro 2012 trade marks
Worst UDRP decision of 2009?
G-Star successful in Italy as Milan Court upholds protection for 'Elwood' and ‘Limit Regular’ jeans.
The mother of all UDRP complaints?
Poland: GESTROL is not always similar to GESTROLTEX
     + 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 ©2008-2010 MARQUES Ltd and Individual Contributors