tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post1685445275957259100..comments2024-03-29T09:21:58.696+00:00Comments on The IPKat: ECJ dilution ruling splits well-informed blog readershipVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-16775072775070348962009-07-03T13:22:27.582+01:002009-07-03T13:22:27.582+01:00Good point, Ilanah. I was oversimplifying in true...Good point, Ilanah. I was oversimplifying in true blue-rinse fashion...Hastings Guisenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-61917222789299712972009-07-03T12:46:02.075+01:002009-07-03T12:46:02.075+01:00In the USA the scope of the concept of dilution in...In the USA the scope of the concept of dilution includes blurring, tarnishment and free riding.<br /><br />If free riding and unfair advantage means the same is all but a question for academics.<br /><br />The real question is: what is "unfair"!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-81185898784894398522009-07-03T10:55:17.455+01:002009-07-03T10:55:17.455+01:00Hastings,
I agree with you about L'Oreal, bu...Hastings, <br /><br />I agree with you about L'Oreal, but we shouldn't forget that what the ECJ says in Intel about the relevant public, establishing a link/association and standards of proof also applies to unfair advantage. The two types of harm are conceptually different, but they've been lumped together by the drafters of the directive, and so the same preliminary criteria apply to both.Ilanahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04769375670713505896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-55654049193124178342009-07-03T09:57:54.179+01:002009-07-03T09:57:54.179+01:00Regarding the poll, and at risk of sounding like a...Regarding the poll, and at risk of sounding like a blue-rinsed pedant, I wish that commentators (whether feline or human) would distinguish better between dilution and unfair advantage.<br /><br />As we all know by now, dilution is damage to the value of a trade mark as an identifier through a proliferation of similar marks, while unfair advantage (as the name implies) is basically free-loading on someone else's rep.<br /><br />Intel covered dilution and Loreal v Bellure covered unfair advantage -- different cases covering totally different points of law.<br /><br />So why did the commentary on Intel ramble on about unfair advantage while commentary on Loreal v Bellure constantly name-checks dilution?<br /><br />It is forgivable (although still annoying) on the part of the ill-informed general press; however, the Kats really should know better.<br /><br />Why, oh why, oh why....Hastings Guisenoreply@blogger.com