• 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

Advocate General strengthens ÖKO-TEST in trademark dispute

18. January 2019

Are dealers allowed to advertise with the ÖKO-TEST-Label exclusively for the tested products or also for almost identical products in a different colour, design or packaging? The Advocate General of the European Court of Justice strengthens ÖKO-TEST in the trademark dispute over the well-known test seal in today’s decision.

Questions referred by OLG Düsseldorf

ÖKO-TESTToday’s OPINION OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL is based on the questions referred by the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court (OLG Düsseldorf). The plaintiff ÖKO-TEST invokes his Union word mark, registered since 2012, and the DE word/figurative mark, also registered since 2012. It also invokes that it is the proprietor of identical, unregistered, earlier, well-known individual trade marks. The defendant before the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court is a manufacturer of toothpastes and concluded a licence agreement with ÖKO-TEST in 2005 in order to advertise her product with this test result from the ÖKO-TEST label, which was current at the time. She also used the well-known test seal in 2014 for a different packaging of the product. ÖKO-TEST complained and asserted that this was not a test-identical product in the sense of the license agreement.

Several procedures in Germany for advertising with the test seal

May dealers with the ÖKO-Test-Label advertise exclusively for the concretely tested products or also for the same or almost the same products in a different colour, design or packaging?

Several proceedings are pending in Germany on this question. Consumers appreciate quality-assured labels such as ÖKO and BIO. Companies therefore like to advertise with the particularly authentic test seals, such as from the Foundation Goods Test, from TÜV or from ÖKO-Test. The Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court has submitted the question of advertising with the ÖKO-TEST seal in the case of toothpaste to the ECJ for decision (I-20 U 152/16). The Federal Court of Justice (BGH), on the other hand, suspended two similar proceedings until a decision of the European Court of Justice in case C-690/17 (Az: I ZR 173/16 and Az: I ZR 174/16). In the cases before the BGH it is a matter of advertising with the ÖKO-TEST seal for the same products in different colour designs and for products with slight differences to the tested product.

ECJ has to decide on trademark infringement of test seals

The Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court referred the following question to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling:

Is it infringing to affix the individual mark to a product for which the individual mark is not protected, in particular in the case of well-known individual marks such as the test seals?

ÖKO-TEST’s action marks are registered in Nice class 35 for “Consumer advice and consumer information for the selection of goods and services”, but not for example for toothpaste or toothpaste-like goods. In addition, the plaintiff’s trademarks in Germany are mainly known as test seals, even very well known, but are not regarded as trademarks. Previous European case law, however, requires an identity with regard to both the trademark and the goods/services concerned when infringing any other trademark function (ECLI:EU:C:2010:159, ECLI:EU:C:2010:163).

Therefore, the second part of the question referred for a preliminary ruling also arises:

Is it trademark infringement if the very well-known individual trademark is only known as a test seal, but not as a trademark, and is used by third parties as a test seal?

Advocate General strengthens trademark owner ÖKO-TEST

The Advocate General has expressed his support for the arguments of ÖKO-TEST with today’s opinion of Advocate General. The proprietor of a “quality mark” registered for the purpose of “informing and advising consumers on their choice of goods and services, in particular by using the results of tests and analyses and quality judgments” must be authorised to oppose the use of his mark, which is used without his authorisation. This applies as soon as a third party applies the trade mark to a product for which it is not registered.

In the Advocate General’s view, the infringement is a trade mark infringement within the meaning of the Trade Mark Law because ÖKO-TEST is registered as a single, national and Union trade mark. It must therefore enjoy the protection afforded to that type of mark, irrespective of whether or not the public is aware of the trade mark registration. ÖKO-TEST may therefore rely on the protection of well-known trade marks if German consumers are familiar with that logo. That is a factual assessment which is the sole responsibility of the national court. In that connection, the Advocate General also points out that Article 9(2)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001 provides particularly comprehensive protection for well-known trade marks.

 

Would you also like to protect your trademark or brand?

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

CAT-call_en

Sources:

Opinion of Advocate General (Case C:2019:39)

Picture:

geralt / pixabay.com / CC0 License

 

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet  
  • share 

Category iconInternational Intellectual Property,  Trademark Law,  Licenses Tag icontrademark infringement,  Licensing,  Advocate General,  Opinion of Advocate General,  AG,  test seal,  well-known individuel marks,  ÖKO-TEST,  brand,  ECJ

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: International Intellectual Property

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

  • Own trademark application fails – despite comparable trademarks: Equal treatment? 5. March 2021
  • Intel to pay 2.2 billion in damages – to VLSI / Fortress Investment 5. March 2021
  • BGH “FRAND II” – SEP Licensing as Distributor? 2. March 2021
  • Suspension of infringement proceedings 1. March 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:

5. March 2021
Own trademark application fails – despite comparable trademarks: Equal treatment?

Own trademark application fails – despite comparable trademarks: Equal treatment?

2. March 2021
BGH “FRAND II” – SEP Licensing as Distributor?

BGH “FRAND II” – SEP Licensing as Distributor?

1. March 2021
Suspension of infringement proceedings

Suspension of infringement proceedings

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?

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