Now in its twelfth 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.
Who we all are...
TUESDAY, 21 FEBRUARY 2012
Another slam-dunk delivered in General Court
In Case T-596/10, the General Court rejected the appeal against the contested decision which found there was no likelihood of confusion between the following signs:
Contested CTM v Earlier CTM
Firstly, the goods and services in classes 9, 25, 28 and 41 were held to be similar or identical, except for “digital recording supports, such as DVD, CD-CD-Rom”.
Secondly, the signs were found similar from a visual, aural and conceptual point of view. However, the earlier sign and its element ‘basket’ being descriptive for the registered goods, it has a very low distinctive character because it will be perceived automatically as a reference to the famous sports game and to the hoop where players shoot the ball to score which is present at both ends of a basketball court, and thus an indication of the use of the goods. Therefore, since in the contested sign the element ‘euro’ occupies the same importance as the element ‘basket’, there is no risk that the average consumer believes there are from the same family of marks.
Posted by: Laetitia Lagarde @ 15.25
General court, likelihood of confusion, eurobasket, basket,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Reader Comments: 0
Post a Comment
MARQUES does not guarantee the accuracy of the information in this blog. The views are those of the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect those of MARQUES. Seek professional advice before action on any information included here.
The Class 46 Archive