Brexit EU-trademarks and Designs

If England leaves the European Union, there won´t be consequences just for English companies. In general, every company owning a European Union Trademark or European Union design will lose protection in the United Kingdom. A solution should be found in the coming years. There are three possible options. The owner of the EU trademark or design loses all his rights (highly unlikely), a one to one transformation of rights, or the EU rights will be converted into national rights. The last option is already being used in certain procedures and therefore is the most probable option.

How does conversion work? Owners of EU trademarks or designs will be granted a term (for example 6 months) to specifically convert their rights into national rights in the UK. The procedure will be the same as a normal national application in the UK. Meaning the same costs, but also the examination of the authorities (on absolute grounds) and opposition possibilities for third parties. Do not close your eyes for these matters. Anticipate if the UK market is relevant. In case of filing for a European Union trademark or European design, also request protection through a National registration in the UK.

trademark-registration



Latest news
Rituals vs. The Body Shop: Battle of the Brands
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
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?