• 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

Neymar wins name dispute – trademark registration in bad faith

14. May 2019

World footballer Neymar won today in the trademark dispute over his own famous name before the European Court. The word mark NEYMAR was registered as a trade mark in 2012. Today’s judgment confirms the declaration of invalidity of that mark and also finds trademark filing in bad faith.

NEYMAR registered as word mark

NeymarThe case began in 2012, when Mr Carlos Moreira applied for the word mark NEYMAR at the European Office for International Protection of Intellectual Property (EUIPO) – in Nice Class 25 for “clothing, footwear, headgear”. The desired trade mark application was published in the Community Trade Marks Bulletin.

The famous footballer Neymar Da Silva Santos Júnior, known as Neymar, filed an application for a declaration of invalidity pursuant to Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 against the registration of the mark applied for, which was upheld by the Opposition Division of the EUIPO and confirmed by the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO.

Judgment of the European Court

In today’s judgment, the European Court (CJEU, Court of First Instance CFI) upholds the previous decisions and finds that the trade mark applicant acted in bad faith in filing an application for registration of the mark Neymar. That was the only plea raised by the trade mark applicant, who rejected a malicious trade mark application.

Bad faith requires legal interpretation

Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 provides that an EU trade mark must be declared invalid on application to the EUIPO or on the basis of a counterclaim in infringement proceedings if the applicant for registration acted in bad faith when filing the application for registration of that trade mark.

However, the concept of bad faith in this regulation is not defined, delimited or even described, but requires legal interpretation. The Lindt & Sprüngli judgment of 2009 made it particularly clear that the applicant’s intention to register at any given time is a subjective factor to be determined by reference to the objective circumstances of the individual case (see, by analogy, judgment of 11 June 2009, Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli, C-529/07, EU:C:2009:361). The concept of malicious intent and bad faith thus refers to a subjective motivation of the applicant, namely a dishonest intention or other dishonest motive.

In today’s ruling (EU:T:2019:329), the European Court of Justice specified that the conduct in question deviates from the recognised principles of ethical conduct or honest business and commercial practices.

Was Neymar a well-known footballer in 2012?

In the present case, the trade mark applicant argued that, in filing the trade mark application Neymar, he did not see any connection at all with the world footballer, but chose the trade mark merely because of the phonetic sound. It was not until 2013 that Neymar switched to FC Barcelona.

The court rejected that argument. Neymar had already been recognised as a promising footballer and compared with the most prestigious footballers at the time before joining FC Barcelona in 2013, the court clarified. The trademark applicant made himself completely untrustworthy by claiming that he had little knowledge of the football world and that he had no idea that Neymar 2012 was a well-known up-and-coming footballer. For it has been shown that on the same day as the application for the word mark NEYMAR was filed, Mr Moreira also applied for registration of the word mark IKER CASILLAS – also a famous footballer.

The CJEU therefore considered the plaintiff’s dishonest intention to be proven at the relevant time and found a malicious act in the trademark application. In its judgment, the Court also upheld the declaration of invalidity of the mark NEYMAR.

Would you also like to protect or defend your trademark or brand?

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


Sources:

European Court “NEYMAR” EU:T:2019:329

Picture:

Karlnapp75/pixabay.com / CCO License  

 

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Category iconTrademark Law Tag iconbad faith,  CFI,  CJEU,  EU:T:2019:329,  European Court,  famous,  famous name,  football,  footballer,  invalidity,  judgment,  Neymar,  Trademark,  wordmark

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.