STOP PRESS: New Directive replaces 89/104

The IPKat has spotted with some surprise that Saturday's Official Journal of the European Union published Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Codified version). This version replaces First Council Directive 89/104, coming into force twenty days following its publication, which would seem to give us 28 November 2008.

Fortunately, according to the appended Correlation Table virtually all the Articles of 89/104 retain their numbering in the new version. Any inconvenience experienced by the trade mark professions is nothing compared with what will happen when the Community Trade Mark Regulation is codified (see earlier posts here and here).
STOP PRESS: New Directive replaces 89/104 STOP PRESS: New Directive replaces 89/104 Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, November 10, 2008 Rating: 5


  1. So what (if any) significant changes are there between the old directive and the new one?

  2. I noticed that in relation to dilution infringement "not similar" remains (in other words, the Directive does not take account of Adidas v Fitnessworld). One wonders why this could not have be resolved.

  3. I think that, to resolve the "not similar" issue, the process would have had to be a truly legislative one rather than a mechanical consolidation/codification exercise. Once that happens, all the other bits of the Directive are presumably up for grabs too.

  4. It's strictly a codification of existing texts (the initial directive and it's later amendments). There is no substantive change in the new text.

    Apparently the Internal Market directorate of the Commission had nothing better to do. There are a couple of other IP texts which have been codified as well or are about to be.


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:

Powered by Blogger.