The IPKat is getting all excited again about the intellectual property cases coming up before the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Court of First Instance (CFI).
Tomorrow we get judgment in Case C-286/04 P Eurocermex v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market, in which the IPKat firmly expects the ECJ to dismiss the substantive grounds of appeal against the CFI's refusal to register as a Community trade mark a ludicrous mark consisting of an open bottle of beer with a wedge of green-skinned lemon stuck into its spout.
On the same day we get judgment in a case that has sort of come up on the blind side without anyone noticing it: Case C-28/04 Tod's and Tod's France. This is a reference from the Tribunal de Grand Instance de Paris for a preliminary ruling on the compatitibility of Community law with a provision of French law that makes copyright protection subject to a distinguishing criterion based on the country of origin of the work.
On Thursday 7 July, as if this isn't enough, there's also judgment in Case C-418/02 Praktiker Bau- und Heimwerkermärkte, a German reference on the registrability of service marks for retail sales as trade marks.
On the same morning we get judgment Case C-353/03 Nestlé, a reference on whether the slogan HAVE A BREAK has acquired distinctiveness through use, when it has hitherto been extensively used as part of a larger slogan, HAVE A BREAK ... HAVE A KIT-KAT, which itself contains the famous KIT-KAT trade mark.
On Thursday 14 July there's a hearing of Case C-361/04 P Ruiz-Picasso and Others v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market, in which the estate of the late artist Pablo Picasso will have its final fling at stopping the registration of the word mark PICARO for motor vehicles, based on an alleged likelihood of confusion with its earlier registration of PICASSO for goods in the same class.
On the same date the ECJ gives judgment in Case C-192/04 Lagardère Active Broadcast, on payments of royalties in respect of broadcasting rights (the Advocate General's Opinion was not translated into English here, alas).
Finally, welcoming an old friend back, on Wednesday 6 July there's a hearing on the appeal to the CFI of Case T-346/04 Sadas v OHIM - LTJ Diffusion (ARTHUR ET FELICIE), between two parties who have already been to Luxembourg on the question of identity of trade marks.
This blog will do its best to pick these decisions up as they come out, language permitting ...
Wednesday, 29 June 2005
Posted by Jeremy at 3:46:00 pm