• 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

Slogan as an Unionmark? Difficult!

11. October 2018

Does the word mark COOKING CHEF GOURMET have a descriptive effect? The European Court of Justice, like the EUIPO, says “yes” and rejects the trademark registration. An effective advertising slogan does not mean that it gives consumers a guarantee about the origin of the goods and services.

The trademark applicant is the owner of the CHEF trademark

sloganDe Longhi Benelux SA, based in Luxembourg, has already successfully established the trade mark CHEF. The earlier trade mark CHEF is well known and has been used intensively and for many years since the 1950s, argued the plaintiff De Longhi Benelus. In 2016, it filed an application with the European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) for registration of the word mark as a Union trade mark. The registration should be made for the following Nice classes:

  • Class 7 (e.g. electrical food mixers)
  • Class 11 (Induction cooking appliance with a food mixture)

However, the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO refused the registration. The verbal elements of the mark applied for are descriptive of the purpose of the goods concerned, are laudatory and are frequently used in everyday language to describe food and drink. Therefore, the mark applied for is inherently devoid of any distinctive character.

The fact that the three elements making up the word mark COOKING CHEF GOURMET are juxtaposed does not mean that the mere omission of an article or preposition in its structure is sufficient to make it a lexical invention capable of conferring distinctive character on that sign (see also No likelihood of confusion: POST, INFOPOST and ePOST vs InPost).

De Longhi Benelux SA brought an action against the EUIPO decision and argued essentially:

  1. the Board of Appeal did not even analyse the overall impression of the mark applied for, which is, however, decisive for its distinctive character
  2. the mark applied for is already distinctive because the applicant is the proprietor of the earlier mark with a reputation, CHEF

CJEU confirms the EUIPO’s rejection of the trademark

In its judgment, the CJEU rejected the plaintiff’s first point. Admittedly, advertising messages may also be expressly protected as trade marks if they are used as indications of quality or as incitements to purchase the goods or services covered by those trade marks. This could be the case if these marks are not only an ordinary advertising message, but have a certain originality or resonance, which requires at least an interpretation by the relevant public, the CJEU clarified. This is not the case with the mark applied for. The slight grammatical imperfection does not mean that a consumer must first consider that the controversial term means that the consumer is capable of cooking and cooking like a real gourmet- this is obvious.

The second plea in law was also rejected. The word sign CHEF is clearly different from the sign applied for, since it also contains the word elements “cooking” and “gourmet”. In addition, the plaintiff had not relied on the well-known reputation of its trademark CHEF before the EUIPO, so that this was irrelevant for the CJEU’s reasoning.

The CJEU therefore dismissed the action in its entirety and confirmed the EUIPO’s rejection of the trademark.

Slogan as Unionmark registration difficult – but not impossible

The fact that a trademark registration of a slogan is difficult to distinguish is due to the descriptive nature of advertising messages. The judgments of recent years show that trademark protection is difficult, but possible. However, “Quality has a future” (judgment of December 11, 2012) has failed as a trademark registration, as have “Inspired by efficiency” (judgment of June 6, 2013) and “We make the special simple” (judgment of July 12, 2012).

Deutsche Bank also failed in its attempt to protect “Passion to Perform” as a Union trademark (judgment of March 25, 2014). Although this slogan was already protected as a national trademark in several EU countries, the CJEU rejected the trademark registration. The existence of identical or similar registrations at the national level was not a reason for registering trademarks without distinctive character, the CJEU ruled at that time.

Ambiguity and need for interpretation increase chances of success

However, the German car manufacturer Audi was able to protect its slogan “Progress through Technology” (in German: “Vorsprung durch Technik“) as a Union trademark (ruling January 21, 2010). In this case, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) overturned the EUIPO’s previous rejection of the trademark in its ruling. This is because the factual statement that resonates in the slogan does not clearly emerge from the slogan, but rather requires a certain amount of interpretation from the public. Moreover, this slogan has a certain originality and conciseness which make it easily memorable. Finally, since the slogan is famous and has been used by Audi for many years, it cannot be ruled out that it will also make it easier for the public to identify the commercial origin of the goods or services designated.

Would you also like to protect your brand or trademark?

Then please do not hesitate to contact us. Our patent attorneys and attorneys at law are experienced and highly qualified in all areas of intellectual property law, both nationally and internationally.

Request your call-back without any obligations!

CAT-call_en

 

Sources:

Curia Europe: T:2018:661

Picture:

Free_Photos /pixabay.com / CCO License  

 

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet  
  • share 

Category iconInternational Intellectual Property,  Trademark Law Tag iconbrand,  ECJ,  wordmark,  Slogan,  EUIPO,  Unionmark,  Union Wordmark,  CHEF

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

  • 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:

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

5. February 2021
Trade secret: what are ‘appropriate’ secrecy measures?

Trade secret: what are ‘appropriate’ secrecy measures?

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