For the half-year to 30 June 2014, the IPKat's regular team is supplemented by contributions from guest bloggers Alberto Bellan, Darren Meale and Nadia Zegze.

Two of our regular Kats are currently on blogging sabbaticals. They are David Brophy and Catherine Lee.

Tuesday, 15 February 2005

TODAY'S NEWS FROM LUXEMBOURG


The Court of First Instance (CFI) of the European Court of Justice has just handed down two new decisions in appeals from the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) today. Both appeals were dismissed.

* Case T-169/02 Cervecería Modelo, SA de CV v OHIM: an application to register a figurative mark contianing the words NEGRA MODELO for beers was correctly refused on the ground of likelihood of confusion with an earlier national registration of a figurative mark consisting of the word MODELO for the same product. The CFI held that the OHIM Board of Appeal was right to hold that, though the marks were different, the dominant element of each of them was the word MODELO.

* Case T-296/02 Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG v OHIM: this was an application to register LINDENHOF for beer and other beverages which succeeded despite an opposition filed by the owner of an earlier national trade mark LINDERHOF for sparkling wines. On the question of comparison of goods the CFI said:
"54 Sparkling wines are alcoholic drinks and, as such, clearly distinct from non-alcoholic drinks such as the drinks covered by the trade mark application, both in shops and on drinks menus. The average consumer, deemed to be reasonably well-informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, is used to and aware of that distinction between alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks, which is, moreover, necessary, since some consumers do not wish to or cannot consume alcohol.

55 Furthermore, if the drinks covered by the trade mark application are drunk on special occasions and for enjoyment, they are also consumed, if not substantially, on other occasions and for relaxation. Thus they are rather everyday consumer items. Sparkling wines, on the other hand, are drunk almost solely, if not solely, on special occasions and for enjoyment and much less frequently than the goods covered by the trade mark application. They are in a much higher price bracket than are the drinks covered by the trade mark application.

56 Finally, sparkling wines are no more than an atypical replacement for the drinks covered by the trade mark application. The goods in question cannot therefore be considered to be in competition with each other.

57 The fact referred to by the applicant that the goods in question may be consumed one after the other or even mixed is not such as to alter the findings set out in the preceding paragraphs. It is true of many drinks which are not, however, similar (for example rum and cola).

58 The same is true of the fact referred to by the applicant that the advertising for the goods in question always shows a person who enjoys a moment of happiness whilst drinking the beverage concerned, inasmuch as that fact applies to almost all drinks, even the most varied.

59 In view of the above, it must be concluded that the goods in question are more dissimilar than they are similar. However, the differences between them are not sufficient of themselves to exclude the possibility of a likelihood of confusion, in particular where the mark applied for is identical to an earlier mark which is particularly distinctive ...".
The IPKat wrote these notes in a bit of a hurry and will revisit them tomorrow to see if he got them right or not ...

5 comments:

Brian said...

Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!

I have a list mailing team site/blog. It pretty much covers list mailing team related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time :-)

Dan said...

Good blog but without advertising photographer you have little chance of selling anything.

Brian said...

Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!

I have a online advertising agency site/blog. It pretty much covers online advertising agency related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time :-)

Brian said...

Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!

I have a cash franchise payplan safelist site/blog. It pretty much covers cash franchise payplan safelist related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time :-)

Anonymous said...

putting to waste some good money that could have been used in other areas of development for the business involved.

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

Just pop your email address into the box and click 'Subscribe':