• 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
      • Eva Maria Amoah
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

VW successful before the European Court in design protection

11. June 2019

The car manufacturer VW AG was successful before the European Court in obtaining VW design protection for three of its car models. Toy manufacturer Rietze had unsuccessfully filed an application for invalidity of the VW Community designs.

As in the comparable proceedings Porsche versus Autotec concerning the Porsche 911 last week, the proceedings before the European Court (CFI, Court of First Instance) Rietze versus VW (EU:T:2019:378, EU:T:2019:376, EU:T:2019:379 ) dealt with the question whether the older designs of the car models prevent a newer design protection from being granted for the existing car models. Toy manufacturer Rietze had applied for the annulment of three Community designs of the car manufacturer VW AG. The contested designs are not new within the meaning of Article 5 of Regulation No 6/2002 and have no individual character within the meaning of Article 6 of that regulation.

Older VW designs are too similar to the newer ones?

VW CaddyConcretely these proceedings were about the models VW Caddy Maxi, VW Bus T 5 and VW Caddy. In the applications for annulment, the applicant Rietze referred to two earlier designs of VW AG, the predecessor model of the VW Caddy Maxi, the VW Caddy (2K) Life, and the VW Bus T 4 GP, also the predecessor model of the challenged model VW Bus T 5. The Board of Appeal of the EUIPO had dismissed the applications for annulment in all three cases.

Rietze argued that the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO should have weighted the characteristics of the designs to be compared, since the appearance of a vehicle design is more influenced by certain characteristics. In addition, the applicant claimed that the Board of Appeal should have differentiated between aesthetic and technical characteristics.

EuG confirms VW design protection

The European Court (CFI) rejected this. The Board of Appeal analysed the contested designs on the basis of their fronts, sides and backs, individually and in combination, and by no means confined itself to a mere list of the differences between the conflicting designs. Moreover, according to the settled case-law of the Court of Justice, no weighting of characteristics is necessary.

The Court also rejected the argument that the Board of Appeal had to take account of technicality. Even if they have a technical function, the present characteristics are not purely functional, the CFI held. On the contrary, their appearance may be altered so that any differences in their shape and arrangement may affect the overall impression.

An “informed visitor” is aware of model care

VW Bus T5The CFI also referred – as in the case of Porsche versus Autotec – to the informed user and his attention to the car models. The informed user of motor vehicles is a person who is interested in such vehicles, drives and uses them and is familiar with the models available on the market, the CFI explained in detail. It is aware that manufacturers regularly modernise models which are well established on the market, both technically and in terms of appearance. An informed user is aware that this “model updating” serves to implement certain fashion trends without, however, completely abandoning the characteristic appearance features of the respective vehicle model.

The Board of Appeal therefore found that the informed user was aware of the existing differences between the earlier and more recent designs. In particular, the user observes that the different shape and arrangement of the front headlamps gives the vehicle a different appearance, which affects the overall impression, the Board of Appeal having given reasons for its decision.

The applicant Rietze had not called this assessment into question, therefore the CFI only took into account the applicant’s argument that an informed user attaches less importance to differences between directly successive vehicle models of the same manufacturer than to differences between vehicle models of different manufacturers. The Court rejected the applicant’s argument that the applicant had not put forward any fact in support of the argument.

By its judgment, the CFI confirmed the contested decision of the Board of Appeal and thus rejected the application for invalidity of the three Community designs of VW AG. The VW design protection for the VW models VW Caddy Maxi, VW Bus T 5 and VW Caddy remains unchanged.

 

Would you also like to protect your design or brand?

Our lawyers are experienced in trademark and patent law, national and international law.

 

Sources:

Judgement of CJEU: EU:T:2019:378 , EU:T:2019:376 and EU:T:2019:379 (all in German)

Image:

Carvermittler /pixabay.com / CCO License  

  • share  27 
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet  
  • share 

Category iconDesign Law Tag iconCJEU,  European Court,  CFI,  judgement,  Community Design,  Design,  automotive,  Board of Appeal,  design protection,  VW,  automobile,  informed visitor

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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

  • Chianti vs GHISU: advantage taken unfairly of the earlier mark 15. April 2021
  • ECJ on legitimate interest: Appeal against amendment of specifications 15. April 2021
  • Case law product similarity: consumer attention 13. April 2021
  • OLG Düsseldorf: No compensation for damages of gratuitous licensing 9. April 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. March 2021
Lego brick design: Lego wins stage in EU court

Lego brick design: Lego wins stage in EU court

25. February 2021
Design protection in China: Amendment 2021

Design protection in China: Amendment 2021

25. January 2021
Time limit missed for remedying deficiencies at EUIPO

Time limit missed for remedying deficiencies at EUIPO

22. December 2020
3D printing in design/copyright: Violation of IP rights (2)?

3D printing in design/copyright: Violation of IP rights (2)?

18. December 2020
New Year 2021: News on Nice, Locarno and IPC

New Year 2021: News on Nice, Locarno and IPC

18. December 2020
EUIPO ‘SME Fund’: grant promotes SME applications for IP rights

EUIPO ‘SME Fund’: grant promotes SME applications for IP rights

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