CLASS 46
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...
MONDAY, 18 MAY 2009
Finland: Not so strong, regardless of its name…
The boating season has begun in Finland, and accordingly, a case report in relation to boating is in order. Once again, this case is quite old already (dating back to 2007), but it also had not been reported until recently.
In 1997, Isojoen Konehalli Oy (IK) received a registration for a figurative mark STRONG LINE in International classes 7, 8, 11 and 17. However, the registration included a disclaimer to the words “strong line” alone.
In 2003, IK found out that Fenet Oy (Fenet) had imported keel rollers and bow supports bearing the text “Strong line” to Finland, and accordingly, requested the Helsinki District Court to inter alia enjoin Fenet from using their registered trade mark in its business operations.
The court confirmed that the word mark STRONG LINE had become established as a result of 10 years of use in the international classes 7 and 8, and as “keel rollers” and “bow supports” belong to the International class 8, Fenet not only was enjoined from using the mark for the said goods, but also, all the products bearing the mark would have to be destroyed. This being a decision, against which Fenet naturally filed an appeal.
In its decision of the 31st August 2007 (S 05/1167) the Helsinki Court of Appeal accepted Fenet’s appeal and rejected IK’s plea. The court held that “keel rollers” and “bow supports” do not belong to the International class 8, but to the International class 12, as goods which are intended to be used as parts of other goods are classified to the same class as the latter.
Moreover, even if the respective goods were similar, the evidence submitted did not prove establishment of the word mark STRONG LINE in relation to “keel rollers” and “bow supports”, even though it was sufficient uto prove establishment in relation to pneumatic compressors and different kinds of pumps, vacuum cleaners etc. Hence, there had been no trade mark infringement.
Posted by: Mikael Kolehmainen @ 13.32
Tags:
establishment, finland,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Perm-A-Link: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46?XID=BHA1112
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