• 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

Messi vs Massi before ECJ: no likelihood of confusion

29. September 2020

For years, the trademark dispute Messi vs. Massi has been brought before the European Courts. The ECJ has now confirmed that there is no likelihood of confusion between the two trademarks due to the high degree of recognition of Messi.

Messi

With its judgement (EU:C:2020:722), the highest European Court of Justice (ECJ) confirms the 2018 decision of the CFI at first instance – we reported. With its ruling, the CFI had in turn annulled the decisions of the EUIPO Board of Appeal, which had found a likelihood of confusion in this trademark dispute in the sense of the earlier trademark owner Massi due to the high similarity of Messi and Massi.

The EUIPO and intervener Massi brought therefore an action before the highest European Court of Justice, alleging infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. Essentially, the question was: was the reputation of Messi, which was the subject of the application for the later Union trade mark, to be taken into account in assessing a likelihood of confusion?

The ECJ confirmed this. While the reputation of the earlier mark was undoubtedly a relevant factor for the assessment of the likelihood of confusion, the ECJ explained that the applicant’s possible reputation also had to be taken into account. The ECJ was therefore right to find that “Messi” was therefore conceptually distinct from the word “massi” because of Messi’s high degree of reputation. Accordingly, there was no likelihood of confusion between Messi and Massi, the ECJ ruled and upheld the ECJ’s judgment.

Is the high level of awareness of Messi a known fact?

The second ground of appeal was also rejected by the ECJ. The plaintiffs thus essentially dispute that the reputation of the surname Messi as the surname of the world-famous football player and as a person in public life is a known fact.

However, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice, there is no requirement to prove the accuracy of generally known facts, the ECJ stressed. Moreover, the Court of First Instance’s finding that the facts in question are well known constitutes a fact finding.

By requesting the ECJ to review that finding of fact without, however, alleging distortion of it, the applicants request must be rejected as inadmissible. In any event, the footballer’s high reputation must be taken into account in the assessment of the likelihood of confusion.

The action was therefore dismissed. The reputation of world footballer Messi precludes a likelihood of confusion between Messi and Massi.

Do you also want to protect or defend your trademark?

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 ‘Messi vs. Massi’, EU:C:2020:722

Image:

AbdullahMunzer | pixabay.com | CCO License

  • share  27 
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet  
  • share 

Category iconTrademark Law Tag iconjudgment,  ECJ,  likelihood of confusion,  MESSI,  Messi reputation,  no likelihood of confusion because of reputation,  Messi vs. Massi

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
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:

15. April 2021
Chianti vs GHISU: advantage taken unfairly of the earlier mark

Chianti vs GHISU: advantage taken unfairly of the earlier mark

15. April 2021
ECJ on legitimate interest: Appeal against amendment of specifications

ECJ on legitimate interest: Appeal against amendment of specifications

13. April 2021
Case law product similarity: consumer attention

Case law product similarity: consumer attention

9. April 2021
OLG Düsseldorf: No compensation for damages of gratuitous licensing

OLG Düsseldorf: No compensation for damages of gratuitous licensing

9. April 2021
Alkemie vs. Alkmene: word/figurative mark vs. earlier word mark

Alkemie vs. Alkmene: word/figurative mark vs. earlier word mark

26. March 2021
Colour mark: systematic arrangement of colours decisive

Colour mark: systematic arrangement of colours decisive

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