Sentences with phrase «where trade mark owners»

Not exact matches

At the interlocutory stage in the O2 case, the High Court said that s 10 (6) effectively had to be interpreted to give a trade mark owner a remedy only where the comparative advertising fell outside of the CAD.

This led to clutter on the register, and more uncertainty and cost for trade mark owners, who would have difficulty in clearing marks for use and registration in 28 states, only to have to face expensive litigation against prior marks, where use of those marks in the relevant fields was questionable.

A trade mark owner can not stop a rival using an identical or similar sign in a comparative advertisement where the use is not likely to confuse the public, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled.

Existing EUTM registrations being entered onto the UK trade mark register (with the same registration date and, where applicable, priority and seniority) by way of a simple application by the owner.

This is known as «European exhaustion»; Article 7 (2) which provides an exception to European exhaustion of rights where there are legitimate reasons for the owner to oppose further commercialisation of the goods, especially where the condition of the goods is changed or impaired after they have been put onto the market, and Article 8 (2) which entitles a trade mark owner to invoke its trade mark rights against a licensee who contravenes any provision in his licensing contract with regard to its duration, the form covered by the registration in which the trade mark can be used, the scope of the goods or services for which the licence is granted, the territory in which the trade mark may be affixed, or the quality of the goods manufactured or of the services provided by the licensee.

Article 8 (2) expressly enables the trade mark owner to invoke its trade mark rights against a licensee where the licensee breaches certain provisions in the licence agreement.

Even without any economic harm to the trade mark owner, where the only purpose of the use of the lookalike is to exploit the reputation of the market leader in order to benefit and promote the sale of the lookalike that will confer an unfair advantage and amount to trade mark infringement.»

Where a trade mark has a reputation, its owner may challenge any sign which, without due cause, would take unfair advantage or would be detrimental to the distinctive character or repute of its mark.

The ECJ summarised by ruling that, where a licensee puts luxury goods on the market in contravention of a provision in a licence agreement but must nevertheless be considered to have done so with the consent of the trade mark owner, the proprietor of the trade mark can rely on such a provision to oppose a resale of those goods on the basis of Art 7 (2) of the Trade Marks Directive only if it can be established that, taking into account the particular circumstances of the case, such resale damages the reputation of the trade trade mark owner, the proprietor of the trade mark can rely on such a provision to oppose a resale of those goods on the basis of Art 7 (2) of the Trade Marks Directive only if it can be established that, taking into account the particular circumstances of the case, such resale damages the reputation of the trade trade mark can rely on such a provision to oppose a resale of those goods on the basis of Art 7 (2) of the Trade Marks Directive only if it can be established that, taking into account the particular circumstances of the case, such resale damages the reputation of the trade Trade Marks Directive only if it can be established that, taking into account the particular circumstances of the case, such resale damages the reputation of the trade trade mark.

In Davidoff the European Court of Justice held that relevant and sufficient consent may be express or, in exceptional circumstances, implied where from the facts and circumstances prior to, simultaneous with, or subsequent to the goods being placed on the market outside the European Economic Area (EEA), the trade mark owner has unequivocally demonstrated that he has renounced his right to oppose placing the goods on the market in the EEA.