Louis Keijzer passes BBMM exam with flying colours

In January, the final oral exams were held as part of the Professional Training of Benelux Trademark and Design Attorneys. This exam marks the culmination of the two-year course. This year, 15 candidates from Belgium and the Netherlands were examined. Our colleague Louis Keijzer did particularly well. Both Louis and Abcor are extremely proud that he passed this practical exam as the best Dutchman.


Acquiring this diploma is an essential condition for obtaining the BMM certification mark. The Benelux Foundation for the Professional Training of Trademark and Design Attorneys (BBMM) is responsible for providing this two-year training. Admission to the course is limited to candidates with sufficient relevant work experience.

The first year of the study emphasizes mainly theoretical aspects, while the second year focuses increasingly on practical skills. Both years conclude with an exam, which candidates must pass. Upon successful completion of the exam, candidates with at least three years of relevant work experience can apply for the BMM certification mark, provided they also have sufficient demonstrable work experience. Passing this exam makes Louis the 5th European Trademark Attorney at Abcor.

other-general

Latest news
Abcor team in World Trademark Review 1000
Competitor registers domain name
Electrode product or part?
TOP 40 for Dutch Expats
HART – the importance of trademark research
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?