Types of infringement of a right to trade marks with reputation in Polish and EU jurisprudence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15290/eejtr.2024.08.01.03Słowa kluczowe:
trade mark with reputation, parasitism, dilution, blurring, tarnishmentAbstrakt
This article aims at examining the extent to which the Polish and European Union adjudication bodies apply the EUCJ guidelines regarding determination of each type of the right to a trade mark with reputation (TMwR) infringement. The author analyses and interprets legal provisions of EUTMR and argumentations of variety decisions of European Union and Polish adjudication bodies concerning the problem of an infringement of a right to a TMwR. A close analysis of the latest judicial decisions concerning the TMwR protection indicates that, in principle, detailed guidelines regarding the occurrence of each form of the TMwR infringement are already in place. However, there are still some deviations from these guidelines, most notably in the Polish jurisdiction, since adjudicating bodies tend to see parasitism in the probability of association of juxtaposing trade marks alone. Thus, it happens that a three-step test on the likelihood of transferring trade mark with reputation associations onto goods/services designated with a third party mark (as described below) is omitted. This is especially significant where a later sign is used for goods/service that are not similar to those that are signed by the TMwR. Furthermore, an enhanced evidentiary standard applied in the Intel case seems to be frequently absent in the practice of law application. Changes in the economic behaviour of the average consumer or a serious likelihood that such a change will occur are hardly ever taken into account in the assessment of the activity detrimental to the distinctive character or the repute of a TMwR. Although many years have passed since key preliminary rulings were issued by the EUCJ, which shaped the principles of examining the evidence that pointed to the possibility of an infringement of a right to a TMwR, some negligence and shortcomings in the application of the law in this respect have not been entirely eliminated. Hopefully, the years to come will witness a greater awareness of the binding provisions and principles of their application among adjudication bodies and interested parties alike.
Pobrania
Bibliografia
Beebe, B. (2006). A Defense of the New Federal Trademark Antidilution Law. Fordham Intell. Prop. & Media Ent. L. J., 16(4), 1143-1174.
Bohaczewski, M. (2019). Naruszenie prawa ochronnego na renomowany znak towarowy. Warszawa: C.H. Beck.
Bohaczewski, M. (2021). In Ł. Żelechowski, Komentarze Prawa Prywatnego: Prawo własności przemysłowej. Komentarz (vol. VIIIB). Warszawa: C.H. Beck.
Cohen Jehoram T., Van Nispen, C., & Hutdecoper, T. (2010). European trademark law: Community trademark law and harmonized national trademark law. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International B.V.
Derenberg, W.J. (1956). The Problem of Trademark Dilution and the Antidilution Statutes. California Law Review, 44(3), 439-488.
Gielen, C. (2013). Trademark Dilution in the European Union. In D.R. Bereskin (Ed.), International Trademark Dilution (pp. 203-240). Westlaw.
McCarthy, J.T. (2001). McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition. St. Paul (Minnesota): Thomson West.
Middlemiss, S., & Warner, S. (2009). The Protection of Marks with a Reputation: Intel vs. CPM. E.I.P.R., 326(331-332).
Senftleben, M. (2013). Adapting EU Trademark Law to New Technologies – Back to Basics?. In C. Geiger (Ed.), Constructing European Intellectual Property: Achievements and New Perspectives (pp. 137-176). Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Senftleben, M. (2017). In A. Kur & M. Senftleben, European Trade Mark Law. Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Simon Fhima, I. (2011). Trade Mark Dilution in Europe and the United States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sitko, J. (2019). Naruszenie prawa do znaku towarowego renomowanego (studium prawnoporównawcze). Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer.
Skrzydło-Tefelska, E. (2015). In G.N. Hasselblatt (Ed.), Community Trade Mark Regulation. A Commentary, Oxford: CH Beck/Hart/Nomos.
Skubisz, R. (2009). Kolizja późniejszego znaku towarowego z wcześniejszym renomowanym znakiem towarowym. Glosa do wyroku TS z dnia 27 listopada 2008r., C-252/07 Intel. EPS, 2, 33-38.
Skubisz, R. (2013). Czerpanie nienależnych korzyści z charakteru odróżniającego lub renomy znaku towarowego. In A. Dębiński, P. Stanisz, T. Barankiewicz, J. Potrzeszcz, W. S. Staszewski, A. Szarek-Zwijacz & M. Wójcik (Eds.), Abiit, non obiit. Księga poświęcona pamięci Księdza Profesora Antoniego Kościa SVD (pp. 1285-1297). Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.
Szczepanowska-Kozłowska, K. (2015). In E. Nowińska & K. Szczepanowska-Kozłowska (Eds.), System Prawa Handlowego, vol. 3, Prawo własności przemysłowej. Warszawa: C.H. Beck.
Welkowitz, D.S. (2012). Trademark Dilution. Federal, State and the International Law. Arlington: Bureau Of National Affairs.
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Numer
Dział
Licencja
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
1. The Author declares that he or she has created the written work and holds exclusive and unlimited copyright /both moral and property rights/ and guarantees that no third parties have rights to the work.
2. In the view of the Copyright and Related Rights Act, a work must fulfill the following criterion:
a) be a manifestation of creative work,
b) have an individual character („author’s personal stamp”),
c) have a set form.
3. The Author declares that the text has not been previously published (under the same or different title, or as a part of another publication).
4. The Author allows (grants a non-exclusive license) the publishing house of University of Białystok to use the scholarly text to:
- preserve and multiply by means of any technique; save in a digital form with no limitations as to the manner and form of digital preservation;
- upload online with no limitations as to the place and time of access.
5. The Author grants consent for editorial changes made in the work.
6. The Author grants the University of Białystok rights free of charge for the duration of property copyright with no territory limits. The University has the right to grant sublicenses in the acquired rights.
7. Granting a non-exclusive license allows the Author to preserve their rights and allows other parties to make use of the work according to sublicensing agreement with provisions identical as those of Attribution 4.0 Internacional License (CC BY 4.0), available online at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. License to all its content published from 2023 and CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 to all its content published from 2017 to 2022.
8. The Agreement has been concluded for an indefinite period of time.
9. Because of costs born in preparation of the work for publishing, the Parties oblige themselves to act in good faith and refrain from declining to grant licenses.
10. To all matters not settled herein, provisions of the Civil Code and Copyright and Related Rights Act of 1994, February 4 shall apply.
11. All disputes shall be resolved by a court of local jurisdiction for the place of seat of University of Białystok.
