Assessing the Distinctive Character of a Sign Referencing a Place of Interest

Journal article

1 online resource (page 1084–1089)

Official headnotes (translated from the German by David Wright-Policepayeh) a) The ground for refusal of a lack of distinctive character pursuant to Sec. 8(2) No. 1 Trade Mark Act precludes the registration of a trade mark for goods and services designated by a broad generic term even if it only applies with regard to individual goods and services falling under the generic term. b) If the public perceives the sign comprising the name of a place of interest consisting of an adjectival place name and the name of a building (here: Kölner Dom [Cologne Cathedral]) in connection with goods that can be considered as travel souvenirs or requisites, as being only the designation of the place of interest and not as an indication of the commercial origin of these goods, the sign lacks any distinctive character within the meaning of Sec. 8(2) No. 1 Trade Mark Act (confirming judgment of the Federal Supreme Court, 8 March 2012 – I ZB 13/11, BGHZ 193, 21 – Neuschwanstein; distinguishing judgment of the CJEU, 6 September 2018 – C-488/16, GRUR 2018, 1146 – Bundesverband Souvenir Geschenke Ehrenpreise v. EUIPO [Neuschwanstein]).

Crossref

GRUR International ; 73, 11, 2024, 2632-8550.

[Oxford, England] : Oxford University Press (OUP), 2024.

English

https://academic.oup.com/grurint/article/72/3/231/6998505

External Online Journals > GRUR