Balancing Obligations in a Trade Mark Coexistence Agreement

Balancing Obligations in a Trade Mark Coexistence Agreement

Journal article

1 electronic resource (page 761–771)

Extract Regulation (EU) 2017/1001, Arts. 9, 60(3); Civil Code, Arts. 1281–1287; Trade Marks Law, Art. 34; Unfair Competition Law, Arts. 6, 11 ‒ Polo Ralph Lauren v Bridge Headnotes by the Editorial Office 1. When a transaction implies reciprocal concessions to reach an agreement, reciprocity constitutes a vital parameter in its interpretation. Interpreting an agreement through the principle of reciprocity implies balancing the obligations of the parties. 2. In this vein, and in the absence of express provision by the parties, the obligation of party A to recognize party B’s exclusive rights to use a certain sign on clothing worldwide, which is reciprocated by party B’s obligation not to bring infringement or opposition proceedings against party A, implies that the latter obligation also has a worldwide scope. 3. The widespread and well-known practice of applying very simple figurative elements to decorate goods – figures applied to garments – leads to the conclusion that there is no likelihood of confusion even if the goods in question are identical and there is a certain similarity between the signs at issue.

Crossref

GRUR International ; 74, 8, 2025, 2632-8550.

[Oxford, England] : Oxford University Press (OUP), 2025.

eng

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

External Online Journals > GRUR