• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees’ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Karl-Hermann Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Clara Elinor Grünewald
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

Crocs loses EU design protection for colored rubber clogs

22. March 2018

The US manufacturer Crocs loses the ligitation over the design of their famous plastic shoes. The General Court of the European Union upholds the ruling of the EUIPO that in 2005 the design protection was wrongly granted. The shoe design had been public for more than twelve months before the application for protective rights.

You hate them or you love them, the colorful holey rubberclogs based on the Dutch original. Because the US company Crocs loses its design rights for the iconic shoes in Europe, others are now allowed to produce the shoes, too. But what happened?

 

Lacking novelty: Community design registration is invalid

On November 22, 2004, the US company Western Brands LLC registered the Crocs design as a Community Design at the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). The application to the EUIPO was preceded by a US patent application of 28 May 2004.

The Community design, approved in February 2005, was then transferred to Crocs on 3 November 2005.

8 years later, in 2013, the French company Gifi Diffusion turned to EUIPO for a declaration of invalidity of the design. The French were of the opinion that the registered Croc design lacked novelty under EU trade mark law.

The EU trade mark law states that all designs that are known to the market for more than 12 months prior to the priority date (in this case the filing of the patent application in the USA) are not considered new and therefore no longer eligible for protection.

On June 6, 2016, EUIPO agreed Gifi Diffusion’s declaration of invalidity because: The shoes in the protected design had already been presented and put up for sale 12 months before the deadline on the Crocs website and at a trade fair. Therefore, according to the EUIPO, the design of the design application was missing novelty.

 

Crocs appealed against decision at the EU General Court

Crocs brought an action against EUIPO’s decision before the General Court of the European Union. Crocs was of the opinion that the disclosures made could not have been known to the professional circles of the industry concerned in the normal course of business in the EU.

The Americans did not deny that the above-mentioned revelatory acts have taken place. But they stated that these did not happen on EU territory. However, according to the European Union court, it does not matter that the revelatory acts did not take place primarily in the EU territory.

Because the nautical fair in Fort Lauterdale, on which the shoes have been presented, was known to international experts and the website has worldwide access. Finally, Crocs could not prove that the design of their rubber shoes had not been made public by at least one of the revelatory acts prior to the deadline.

Thus, the ECJ dismissed the action brought by Crocs and upheld the decision of EUIPO (judgment of the General Court in case T-651/16).

 

Are you interested in brand or trade mark protection?

Please take your chance and contact us. Our lawyers are experienced in trademark and patent law, national and international law.

CAT-call_en

Sources:

Text: Curia Documents, Judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 14 March 2018

Photo: ivabalk / Pixabay.com / CC0 License

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet  
  • share 

Category iconDesign Law,  Trademark Law Tag iconEUIPO,  Crocs

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Design Law

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law
This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

Recent Posts

  • Action against a patent already expired 26. February 2021
  • Design protection in China: Amendment 2021 25. February 2021
  • EPO practice of national patent offices – more uniform 18. February 2021
  • BGH: Black Forest ham – not only packaged in the Black Forest 16. February 2021

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

25. February 2021
Design protection in China: Amendment 2021

Design protection in China: Amendment 2021

16. February 2021
BGH: Black Forest ham – not only packaged in the Black Forest

BGH: Black Forest ham – not only packaged in the Black Forest

16. February 2021
UK trademark after Brexit: earlier UK trademark in opposition

UK trademark after Brexit: earlier UK trademark in opposition

11. February 2021
EU figurative marks: Panthé figurative mark – a panther mark?

EU figurative marks: Panthé figurative mark – a panther mark?

9. February 2021
BGH ruling: Classe E versus German E-Klasse

BGH ruling: Classe E versus German E-Klasse

4. February 2021
Protecting domain names as trademarks

Protecting domain names as trademarks

Footer

Contact

Franklinstr. 61-63
D-60486 Frankfurt am Main
Germany

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Customer Reviews

Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB Patentrecht, Markenrecht, Eigentum hat 4,78 von 5 Sternen 23 Bewertungen auf ProvenExpert.com

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Info secure emails
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

© Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form