Change European Trademarks - the new European Trademark Directive

The European Parliament has approved the new European Trademark Directive, which will come into force on March 23. There are some important changes. The registration fees will be paid per class, which would make applications in less than 3 classes more economical than they are now. The same goes for the renewal of European trademarks.

Apart from this the use of general terms is affected. Starting now the classification has to clearly indicate which goods and services the trademark will be applied for. This is also true for trademarks that are already registered. In the past class headings could be used, implying that all possible goods and services of that particular class were covered. This is no longer the case. Owners of already registered trademarks will be allowed six months to rectify their classification. If this is not done there is a risk that the trademark loses its validity.
The requirement that a trademark must be graphically depicted will also disappear. This means that non-graphical signs may also be registered as a trademark. For example short films (like the lion from MGM), holograms, scent marks, sound marks and taste mark may all be registerable. We will send an extra newsletter regarding this in March.

trademarks



Latest news
The Bulldog rightly claims damages from Red Bull
Trademark Escobar parfum contrary to public order
Abcor team in World Trademark Review 1000
Louis Keijzer passes BBMM exam with flying colours
Competitor registers domain name
Our Clients
Follow Abcor
claimant
defendant
claimant
defendant

IP quiz Trademarks

Puma is one of the bigger sports and lifestyle brands in the world. The core-business is the design, development and sale of (sports) shoes, (sports) clothing and accessories. In 1960, Puma registered an international trademark for a device designed in 1958: the formstrip. Since then, Puma has registered approximately 90 formstrip trademarks with validity in the Benelux or the European Union. Puma claims that this is a serial mark. Monshoe is a wholesaler of women's shoes and related products. The company designs and develops Monshoe shoes which it largely markets itself. Monshoe sells its women's shoes under the brands Shoecolate and Pearlz. The shoe Shoecolate is offered in various colour combinations. Puma claims that Monshoe infringes its well-known formstrip trademark. Monshoe contradicts this and states that the average consumer will not perceive the device of Monshoe on the sneakers as a trademark. And if the public will recognize a trademark in the decoration, it will not make the connection to Puma. According to Monshoe, the formstrip logo is not a well-known trademark within the meaning of the BVIE and the UMVo. There is no likelihood of confusion because the sign does not or hardly evoke any association with Puma among the public. In light of the above, who is right? Does this constitute decorative use or linking to a well-known trademark?