This Thursday and Friday (25 and 26 September) sees the Third European Trade Mark Judges Symposium in Alicante. Approximately 75 judges from the 15 Member States of the EU and the accession countries, together with representatives from OHIM, the CFI, the ECJ, the European Commission and the European Patent Office will gather at this biennial event. Its stated purpose is “to favour the necessary harmonisation in the application of the Community Trade Mark Regulation throughout the legal establishment and in particular by the Community trade mark courts.” The judges will be treated to a programme including:
Registrability of work, 3D and colour marks
Scope of trade mark proprietors’ rights
The concept of genuine use
The position of candidate countries
Developments in the proceedings of CTM courts
The effects of trade mark case law on EU industry
The relationship between OHIM and the CTM courts
The IPKat notes that following a number of high-profile ECJ cases, many of these points are a good deal less uncertain than they must have been two years ago at the previous symposium in Luxembourg. He trusts that getting the judges together will allow them to exchange ideas, potentially leading to greater uniformity in the application and interpretation of trade mark law across the EU. While the symposium is aimed at CTM law, it is also likely to impact on national trade mark law, considering the great similarity between the CTM Regulation and the Harmonisation Directive on which all the Member States’ trade mark laws are based. The IPKat hopes that such harmonisation will be given a push in the right direction by the fact that OHIM has now posted a copy of the national trade mark legislation of each EU Member State on its website. Although the IPKat welcomes this development, he is unhappy that the provision of translations is patchy. For example, the Spanish legislation is only available in Spanish and less popular EU languages are not represented at all.
Inspired by the judges’ example? Bring a bit of harmonisation into your life here, here, here and here
Registrability of work, 3D and colour marks
Scope of trade mark proprietors’ rights
The concept of genuine use
The position of candidate countries
Developments in the proceedings of CTM courts
The effects of trade mark case law on EU industry
The relationship between OHIM and the CTM courts
The IPKat notes that following a number of high-profile ECJ cases, many of these points are a good deal less uncertain than they must have been two years ago at the previous symposium in Luxembourg. He trusts that getting the judges together will allow them to exchange ideas, potentially leading to greater uniformity in the application and interpretation of trade mark law across the EU. While the symposium is aimed at CTM law, it is also likely to impact on national trade mark law, considering the great similarity between the CTM Regulation and the Harmonisation Directive on which all the Member States’ trade mark laws are based. The IPKat hopes that such harmonisation will be given a push in the right direction by the fact that OHIM has now posted a copy of the national trade mark legislation of each EU Member State on its website. Although the IPKat welcomes this development, he is unhappy that the provision of translations is patchy. For example, the Spanish legislation is only available in Spanish and less popular EU languages are not represented at all.
Inspired by the judges’ example? Bring a bit of harmonisation into your life here, here, here and here
PEACE, HARMONY, TRADE MARKS
![<strong>PEACE, HARMONY, TRADE MARKS </strong>]()
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Wednesday, September 24, 2003
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html