For the half-year to 30 June 2013, the IPKat's regular team is supplemented by contributions from guest bloggers Stefano Barazza, Matthias Lamping and Jeff John Roberts.

Two of our regular Kats are currently on blogging sabbaticals. They are Birgit Clark and Catherine Lee.

Thursday, 26 May 2005

OH BABY!


IPKat co-master Ilanah has just unearthed a CFI decision that she's been waiting for for ages. There's just one snag - no English translation, even though the decision was given at the end of April. At the OHIM Board of Appeal stage Ampafrance v Johnson & Johnson (BEBE/MONBEBE) discussed inter alia how to prove detriment to distinctive character (blurring to our American friends) and the degree of likelihood of detriment to distinctive character that is required in registration situations. The IPKat's limited grasp of French causes him to believe that the Art.8(5) issue wasn't discussed by the CFI but if any of his readers know better, he'd love to hear about it. Also, assuming he's right, does anyone know why the Art.8(5) claim went away?


How the ECJ's translation policy makes the IPKat feel...

No comments:

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

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