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

Patentanwaltskanzlei

  • 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. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Walter Benjamin Feldheim
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

ECJ: Outer coloured motif does not have to deviate from the norm

9. October 2020

Colour marks and patterns are business as usual in trademark applications. But what is the situation for a coloured motif that is applied externally like on a bus? This case of the ECJ is all the more interesting because the trademark was applied for is for a service.

angemeldetes farbiges Motiv

The case was brought as a question referred from Sweden, where a bus company wished to have its coloured motif protected as a trade mark, for “transport and conveyance” services in Nice Class 39. This was refused by the Swedish Trade Mark Office on the ground of lack of distinctive character.

Trade mark registration refused – buses are often decorative

In the ensuing appeal proceedings before the Swedish Patent and Trademark Court (Patent- och marknadsdomstol), the bus company claimed that it was a positional mark and, as such, it was affixed in a certain position and size on the buses and trains used for the provision of the services.

However, the Court of First Instance dismissed the action. Since distinctive character must be assessed in the context of an overall assessment, and since coloured decorative motifs are often used on commercial means of transport, consumers consider the signs to be decorative but not an indication of commercial origin, the Court stated reasons for its dismissal.

Question referred by the Swedish Court of Appeal

The appellant appealed against that judgment to the Svea hovrätt, Patent- och marknadsöverdomstolen (Court of Appeal, Patent and Market Court, Stockholm, Sweden). In that context, the Swedish Court of Appeal referred the following question to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), which ruled yesterday:

In order to assess the distinctiveness of signs which are intended to be affixed to certain parts of a transport undertaking’s vehicles in order to distinguish the latter from others, must those signs depart significantly from the norm or customs of the sector?

Assessment criterion: deviation from the standard

The background to this is that, according to settled case-law, the criterion of a significant departure from the norm or customs of the sector must be applied to cases where the sign consists in the appearance of the product itself for which registration of the mark is sought. Average consumers are not in the habit of making assumptions about the origin of products on the basis of their shape or the shape of their packaging in the absence of any graphic or word element.

In its judgment, the ECJ itself referred to its own 2014 Apple Flagshipstore case law, according to which this applies and a significant departure from the norm must be shown where the sign consists of the representation of the configuration of the spatial surroundings in which the services for which the mark is sought are provided.

Coloured motif of the bus company differs from case Apple Flagshipstore

However, such a situation does not exist in the present case around the coloured motif of the bus undertaking. If the sign consists of graphic elements which are to be applied to the goods used for the provision of the services covered by the application, the ECJ specified.

The signs applied for as trade marks cannot be confused with the shape or packaging of those goods, the ECJ ruled, nor are they intended to represent the geographical environment in which the services covered by the application for registration are provided – despite their representation as dotted lines.

The signs consist of colour compositions which are systematically assembled and spatially delimited. The Court emphasised that the applications for registration of the mark thus concern very specific graphic elements. That is an essential element of a trade mark application, which requires clarity and intelligibility as regards the right to protection.

However, such a situation does not arise where, as in the present case, the signs at issue consist of graphic elements which are intended to be applied to the goods used in order to provide the services covered by the trade mark application.

Coloured motif does not represent the spatial surroundings of the service

The Court summarised: The signs applied for as trade marks cannot be confused with the shape or packaging of those goods, nor are they intended to represent the spatial environment in which the services covered by the application for registration are provided, despite their representation as dotted lines.

Consequently, when assessing the distinctive character of a trademark such as the present one – a sign composed of coloured motifs which is intended to be applied to goods intended for the provision of a service in order to be registered as a trademark for that service – it is not necessary to examine whether the signs applied for as trade marks depart significantly from the norm or customs of the sector, the Court of Justice has held.

Is trademark protection also an issue for you?

Our lawyers have many years of expertise in trademark law as well as in the entire field of intellectual property and are entitled to represent you in any court – in Germany and internationally.
Please contact us if you are interested.

 

Sources: 

Judgement of ECJ “Coloured motif as mark for service”, EU:C:2020:813

Image:

OpenClipart-Vectors | pixabay.com | CCO License

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Category iconTrademark Law Tag iconApple Flagship Store,  colour composition,  colour mark,  coloured motif,  deviation from the norm,  ECJ,  goods used for the provision of services,  graphic elements,  packaging,  positional mark,  product from the shape,  representation as dotted lines,  sample,  service,  shape,  spatial surroundings,  Trademark,  trademark for service,  trademark protection for service

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Trademark 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

Recent Posts

  • What is the public allowed to know? 3. June 2024
  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022

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:

3. June 2024
What is the public allowed to know?

What is the public allowed to know?

4. March 2022
Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

25. February 2022
CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks?

CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks?

24. February 2022
EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible

EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible

21. February 2022
CFI: Pumpkin seed oil + PGI symbol

CFI: Pumpkin seed oil + PGI symbol

15. February 2022
SPOTIFY v POTIFY – a ‘pot’ app

SPOTIFY v POTIFY – a ‘pot’ app

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Hanauer Landstrasse 287
D – 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

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
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

Newsletter INT

© Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG

Contact Form

 

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

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

Rückruf INT

Please note: If we deal specifically with your individual case, this is what is known as an initial consultation. In accordance with Section 34 of the Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz, this incurs one-off costs of 190 euros plus MwSt. We will be happy to assist you in a personal consultation after our telephone call.

Kontaktformular

 

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

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

Rückruf

Um dieses Angebot nutzen zu können, müssen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer personenbezogenen Daten zustimmen. Wir behandeln diese streng vertraulich und verwenden sie nur zur Kontaktaufnahme mit Ihnen. Mehr dazu lesen Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.

Bitte beachten Sie: Wenn wir uns konkret mit Ihrem Einzelfall befassen, ist dies eine sogenannte Erstberatung. Für eine solche entstehen gemäß § 34 Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz einmalige Kosten in Höhe von 190 Euro plus MwSt. Gerne helfen wir Ihnen im Anschluss an unser Telefonat in einem persönlichen Beratungsgespräch weiter.