tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post7795350144156677577..comments2024-03-28T13:45:42.289+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Scents and trade marks - The EU reform of olfactory marks and advances in odour recognition techniquesVerónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-15598852340347435832020-10-27T08:15:35.528+00:002020-10-27T08:15:35.528+00:00Whilst a floral fragrance is unlikely to be regist...Whilst a floral <a href="https://couponforless.com/coupon-category/fragrances" rel="nofollow">fragrance</a> is unlikely to be registrable for fabric softeners and the smell of coffee for a type of coffee, one may argue that the distinctiveness requirement may be met in the event of the ascent of a particular type of coffee used consistently applied to all fabric softeners of a single undertaking <br />Cam Nhung Dinhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08430274503983461811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-14875675527255367802018-01-16T15:10:47.174+00:002018-01-16T15:10:47.174+00:00Very interesting, but please see EUIPO Guidelines ...Very interesting, but please see EUIPO Guidelines for Examination in the Office, Absolute Grounds for refusal, Part B, Formalities, Page 33, dated October 1, 2017 where the office provides that "Smell/olfactory or taste marks are currently not acceptable. This is because the representation must be clear, precise, self-contained, easily accessible, intelligible, durable and objective (Article 3(1) EUTMIR), and the current state of technology does not allow these types of marks to be represented in such way. Furthermore, the EUTMIR does not recognise the filing of samples or specimens as suitable representation. A mark description cannot replace the representation, because a description of a smell or taste is neither clear, precise nor objective (see judgment of 12/12/2002, C-273/00, Methylcinnamat, EU:C:2002:748, § 69-73 and decision of 04/08/2003, R 120/2001-2, The taste of artificial strawberry flavour (gust.)). Therefore, any application for an olfactory or taste mark will not be treated as an application for an EUTM (‘deemed not filed’) by the Office."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-12740648242726717482018-01-15T12:42:07.611+00:002018-01-15T12:42:07.611+00:00Interestingly, smell and taste can both be quantif...Interestingly, smell and taste can both be quantified.<br /><br />However, it remains a subjective area precisely because that quantification suffers from a "moving target" of sorts in that the receiver (the human, her brain and her sensory organs) are NOT objective, let alone "repeatable" in the scientific sense (from person to person, and not one person from event to event).<br /><br />As to legal effects though, the law has OFTEN used a type of "standard human model" to deal with subjectivity. There is absolutely no reason why such could not be equally employed in the IP contexts.THE US anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-7218940879675840422018-01-15T08:16:04.256+00:002018-01-15T08:16:04.256+00:00This, of course, puts to one side the point that c...This, of course, puts to one side the point that certain scents can smell quite different to different people, let alone whether different people would agree that scents smell confusingly similar. Therefore, although a test can confirm that two aromatic mixtures contain similar components, one cannot use it to determine identity of smell. The clear, precise and objective criteria are not yet met.Viktor N Rolfnoreply@blogger.com