Trademarks may not be confusingly similar. The trademarks are being compared in order to decide if this is the case. The judge compares the trademarks visually, phonetically and conceptually. However, is one of these criteria sufficient to obstruct another trademark. This is the central question in the ‘Witte Wieven’ cheese case. »10
Not every trademark is automatically accepted by the authorities. As everybody knows, a trademark should be sufficiently distinctive, in order to be admitted. But there are other criteria as well. For example, a trademark may not be conflictive with the public order and morals. In the Benelux trademarks are hardly ever refused on this ground. However, this might be different in other countries and cultures. »trademark-registration
An idea itself cannot be protected, only its implementation can. The shape of a product can be protected by copyrights or design rights. If these rights are not available, in the Netherlands one can rely on the regime of unfair competition to protect the shapes of its products. Especially in the case of counterfeiting this ground has been invoked on a regular base. However, what if a third party, by coincidence, develops the same idea independently? »copyright
There are various types of trademarks. Besides words and logo’s companies also claim less common signs like, packaging, melodies, and even the outline of a shop. Since 2010 there is a new player, namely the hashtag trademark. »trademark-registration
Per April 1, Mirjam de Werd and Frank Schouten joined the Abcor team in Leiden. Mirjam de Werd started her career at a trademark agency and made a transfer to Danone, where she handled the IP portfolio Asia-Pacific as an in-house attorney.Afterwards, she worked as an in-house legal counsel at TV Entertainment Reality Network (new TV-Channel). For the past 15 years, Frank has worked at several trademark agencies, like VO Patents & Trademarks/ Houthoff Buruma Amsterdam/ Merkenbureau Keesom & Hendriks. »other-general
MENTOS has been selling chewing gum under the name MENTOS PURE FRESH for several years. In order to protect her rights MENTOS has registered the following trademarks: the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH, the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH 3 and a figurative depiction of the word PURE.
Defendant sells chewing gum under the trademark DENTYNE PURE and has registered its logo as a trademark.
Infringement or not?