De presentatie wordt gedownload. Even geduld aub

De presentatie wordt gedownload. Even geduld aub

Nieuw Europees merkenrecht: materieel Benelux Merken Congres 2014 Prof. dr. M.R.F. Senftleben Amsterdam, 10 april 2014.

Verwante presentaties


Presentatie over: "Nieuw Europees merkenrecht: materieel Benelux Merken Congres 2014 Prof. dr. M.R.F. Senftleben Amsterdam, 10 april 2014."— Transcript van de presentatie:

1 Nieuw Europees merkenrecht: materieel Benelux Merken Congres 2014 Prof. dr. M.R.F. Senftleben Amsterdam, 10 april 2014

2 Inhoud •dubbele identiteit en uitputting •privé-import van namaakgoederen •goederen in transit •vrijstelling refererend merkgebruik

3 Wetgevingstraject •MPI Study on the Overall Functioning of the European Trade Mark System, 15 februari 2011 •Commission Proposal, 27 maart 2013 •Council: Presidency Compromise Proposal, 20 februari 2014 •Parlement: Legislative Resolution, 25 februari 2014

4 Dubbele identiteit en uitputting

5 Art. 5 lid 1 sub a MRl …to prevent all third parties not having his consent from using in the course of trade: a) any sign which is identical with the trade mark in relation to goods or services which are identical with those for which the trade mark is registered;…

6 Absolute bescherming? HvJ EU 12 November 2002, zaak C-206/01, Arsenal/Reed ‘It follows that the exclusive right under Article 5(1)(a) of the Directive was conferred in order to enable the trade mark proprietor to protect his specific interests as proprietor, that is, to ensure that the trade mark can fulfil its functions.’ (para. 51)

7 HvJ EU 12 November 2002, zaak C-206/01, Arsenal/Reed ‘The exercise of that right must therefore be reserved to cases in which a third party's use of the sign affects or is liable to affect the functions of the trade mark, in particular its essential function of guaranteeing to consumers the origin of the goods.’ (para. 51) Focus op de herkomstfunctie

8 identical signsidentical goods or services adverse effect on one of the protected trademark functions Overzicht

9 ‘These functions include not only the essential function of the trade mark, which is to guarantee to consumers the origin of the goods or services, but also its other functions, in particular that of guaranteeing the quality of the goods or services in question and those of communication, investment or advertising.’ (para. 58) erkenning van verdere beschermde functies, in het bijzonder goodwill functies HvJ EU 18 juni 2009, zaak C-487/07, L’Oréal/Bellure

10 art. 5 lid 1 MRl: verplicht bescherming herkomstfunctie enkele specifieke beperkingen art. 5 lid 2 MRl: optioneel bescherming investeringen flexibel geldige reden verweer exclusief verband met een teken creatie van een merk imago reclame kwaliteit Kritiek: systeem niet langer in balans

11 Commissievoorstel

12 Art. 10 lid 2 sub a Concept MRl …to prevent all third parties not having his consent from using in the course of trade any sign in relation to goods or services where: a) the sign which is identical with the trade mark and is used in relation to goods or services which are identical with those for which the trade mark is registered and where such use affects or is liable to affect the function of the trade mark to guarantee to consumers the origin of the goods or services;…

13 EU Commission, p. 6 The recognition of additional trade mark functions under Article 5(1)(a) of the Directive has created legal uncertainty. In particular, the relationship between double identity cases and the extended protection afforded by Article 5(2) to trade marks having a reputation has become unclear. In the interest of legal certainty and consistency, it is clarified that in cases of both double identity under Article 5(1)(a) and similarity under Article 5(1)(b) it is only the origin function which matters.

14 APRAM, p. 7 Instead of providing legal certainty, this provision generates great uncertainty and further limits the protection of trade marks. Such a provision would result in the recognition of international exhaustion (which is in contradiction with articles 15 of the Directive and 13 of the Regulation under which exhaustion of rights is limited to the territory of the Union). Indeed, in the case of parallel imports, the owner of the trade mark will no longer be able to prevent such parallel imports as the function of origin will not be affected.

15 INTA, p INTA opposes these provisions, which could cause uncertainty in a number of situations including: […] Parallel import cases where original goods have been sold with the consent of the trademark owner only outside the EU […] Trademark owners could no longer enforce their rights against such goods entering the EU and circulating within the EU, since the origin function in these cases is not affected (as the goods stem from the trademark owner).

16 Internationale uitputting?

17 HvJ EU 12 November 2002, zaak C-206/01, Arsenal/Reed ‘The exercise of that right must therefore be reserved to cases in which a third party's use of the sign affects or is liable to affect the functions of the trade mark, in particular its essential function of guaranteeing to consumers the origin of the goods.’ (para. 51) Essentiële herkomstfunctie

18 Hadden we dus reeds vroeger internationale uitputting zonder ons dat te realiseren?

19 Dan staat inmiddels vast dat de herkomstfunctie niet in het gedrang komt bij parallelimporten van buiten de EER. Maar welke andere beschermde functie wordt dan eigenlijk geschaad? …En als er geen schade is, moeten we dan niet gewoon uitgaan van internationale uitputting? (wat reeds eerder het geval was, wat we ons echter niet realiseerden?) En als het Commissievoorstel nu écht geen kans heeft?

20 Of is er een verschil tussen originele producten buiten en binnen de EER?

21 Realistischer scenario

22 Art. 15 lid 1 Concept MRl ‘The trade mark shall not entitle the proprietor to prohibit its use in relation to goods which have been put on the market in the [European Economic Area] under that trade mark by the proprietor or with his consent.’ HvJ EU zal begrijpen dat communautaire uitputting bedoeld is. De voorgestelde nieuwe wetgeving laat daarover geen twijfel ontstaan.

23 Maar dan…

24 art. 5 lid 1 MRl bescherming tegen verwarring enkele specifieke beperkingen art. 5 lid 2 MRl bescherming tegen verwatering flexibel geldige reden verweer exclusief verband met een teken creatie van een merk imago reclame kwaliteit Commissievoorstel consistenter

25 Privé-import van namaakgoederen

26 Art. 10 lid 3 sub c Concept MRl The following, in particular, may be prohibited under paragraph 2: c) importing or exporting the goods under the sign;… Art. 10 lid 4 Concept MRl The proprietor of a registered trade mark shall also be entitled to prevent the importing of goods pursuant to paragraph 3(c) where only the consignor of the goods acts for commercial purposes.

27 EU Commission, p. 6 It should be made clear that the importing of goods into the Union is also prohibited where it is only the consignor who acts for commercial purposes. This is to ensure that a trade mark owner has the right to prevent businesses (whether located in the EU or not) from importing goods located outside the EU that have been sold, offered, advertised or shipped to private consumers, and to discourage the ordering and sale of counterfeit goods in particular over the internet.

28 Wijzigingsvoorstel Parlement en Council …and where such goods, including packaging, bear without authorisation a trade mark which is identical to [the trade mark] registered in respect of such goods, or which cannot be distinguished in its essential aspects from that trade mark. = beperking tot 'counterfeit trademark goods', zoals gedefinieerd in de APV en art. 51 TRIPS Parlement: aanvullende verplichting om consument te informeren (onder meer over rechten tegen de consignor) Council: op dit moment slechts optionele tekst, heroverwegen in het licht van HvJ EU Blomqvist/Rolex

29 Blomqvist • bestelt een 'Rolex' horloge via een Chinese website • douane stopt postpakket met het horloge • wil vrijgave want heeft betaald Rolex • wil vernietiging van het horloge • verzoekt Blomqvist om in te stemmen met vernietiging HvJ EU 6 februari 2014, zaak C-98/13, Blomqvist/Rolex

30 …de verwijzende rechter wenst te vernemen… • of bescherming ex APV slechts kan worden geboden 'indien die verkoop in de betrokken lidstaat wordt beschouwd als een vorm van distributie onder het publiek of als gebruik in het economische verkeer' • of vóór de verkoop 'een verkoopaanbieding moet zijn gedaan aan of reclame zijn gemaakt bij de consumenten van diezelfde staat' (para. 26) HvJ EU 6 februari 2014, zaak C-98/13, Blomqvist/Rolex

31 …in het algemeen wel gerichtheidscriterium van toepassing (zoals eerder ontwikkeld in Philips/Nokia) • '…als „namaakgoederen” of „door piraterij verkregen goederen” worden aangemerkt, wanneer is bewezen dat zij bestemd zijn om in de Unie te worden verhandeld, waarbij dit bewijs is geleverd met name wanneer blijkt dat deze goederen aan een klant in de Unie zijn verkocht of voor deze goederen een verkoopaanbieding is gedaan aan of reclame is gemaakt bij de consumenten van de Unie.' (para. 33) HvJ EU 6 februari 2014, zaak C-98/13, Blomqvist/Rolex

32 …maar in onderhavige zaak heeft reeds verkoop plaats- gevonden… • 'Vaststaat dat in het hoofdgeding het betrokken goed aan een klant in de Unie is verkocht. Een dergelijke situatie is derhalve in geen geval vergelijkbaar met die waarin goederen worden aangeboden op een „elektronische marktplaats”, en a fortiori evenmin met die van goederen die het douanegebied van de Unie zijn binnengebracht onder een schorsingsregeling.' (para. 34) HvJ EU 6 februari 2014, zaak C-98/13, Blomqvist/Rolex

33 …dus is er geen noodzaak voor aanvullende toetsing t.a.v. gerichtheid op consumenten in de EU bescherming op basis van APV veeleer mogelijk • '…zonder dat hoeft te worden nagegaan of vóór die verkoop voor een dergelijk goed tevens een verkoopaanbieding aan het publiek is gedaan of reclame is gemaakt bij de consumenten van de Unie.' (para. 34) HvJ EU 6 februari 2014, zaak C-98/13, Blomqvist/Rolex

34 Goederen in transit

35 Art. 10 lid 5 Concept MRl The proprietor of a registered trade mark shall also be entitled to prevent all third parties from bringing goods, in the context of commercial activity, into the customs territory of the Member State where the trade mark is registered without being released for free circulation there, where such goods, including packaging, come from third countries and bear without authorization a trade mark which is identical to the trade mark registered in respect of such goods, or which cannot be distinguished in its essential aspects from that trade mark.

36 EU Commission, p. 7 The implications of the Philips/Nokia judgment have met with strong criticism from stakeholders as placing an inappropriately high burden of proof on rights holders, and hindering the fight against counterfeiting. […] It is therefore proposed to fill the existing gap by entitling right holders to prevent third parties from bringing goods, from third countries, bearing without authorization a trade mark which is essentially identical to the trade mark registered in respect of those goods, into the customs territory of the Union, regardless of whether they are released for free circulation.

37 Wijzigingsvoorstel Parlement en Council Without prejudice to WTO Rules, in particular Article V of the GATT on freedom of transit, the proprietor of a registered trade mark shall also be entitled to prevent... nog verder gaande voorstellen in het Parlement uiteindelijk afgewezen (met name voorwaarde van bescherming in het bestemmingsland) gevolgen van verwijzing naar 'WTO Rules'?

38 Art. V lid 1 GATT Goods (including baggage), and also vessels and other means of transport, shall be deemed to be in transit across the territory of a contracting party when the passage across such territory, with or without trans-shipment, warehousing, breaking bulk, or change in the mode of transport, is only a portion of a complete journey beginning and terminating beyond the frontier of the contracting party across whose territory the traffic passes. Traffic of this nature is termed in this article 'traffic in transit'.

39 Art. V lid 2 GATT There shall be freedom of transit through the territory of each contracting party, via the routes most convenient for international transit, for traffic in transit to or from the territory of other contracting parties. No distinction shall be made which is based on the flag of vessels, the place of origin, departure, entry, exit or destination, or on any circumstances relating to the ownership of goods, of vessels or of other means of transport.

40 Art. V lid 3 GATT Any contracting party may require that traffic in transit through its territory be entered at the proper custom house, but, except in cases of failure to comply with applicable customs laws and regulations, such traffic coming from or going to the territory of other contracting parties shall not be subject to any unnecessary delays or restrictions and shall be exempt from customs duties and from all transit duties or other charges imposed in respect of transit, except charges for transportation or those commensurate with administrative expenses...

41 Art. V lid 4 GATT All charges and regulations imposed by contracting parties on traffic in transit to or from the territories of other contracting parties shall be reasonable, having regard to the conditions of the traffic. • voorgestelde nieuwe wetgeving t.a.v goederen in transit • 'unnecessary delays or restrictions' in de zin van lid 3? • 'reasonable regulations' in de zin van lid 4?

42 Art. XX sub d GATT Subject to the requirement that such measures are not applied in a manner which would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between countries where the same conditions prevail, or a disguised restriction on international trade, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent the adoption or enforcement by any contracting party of measures:

43 Art. XX sub d GATT d) necessary to secure compliance with laws or regulations which are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, including those relating to customs enforcement, the enforcement of monopolies operated under paragraph 4 of Article II and Article XVII, the protection of patents, trade marks and copyrights, and the prevention of deceptive practices;…

44 Art. 41 lid 1 TRIPS Members shall ensure that enforcement procedures as specified in this Part are available under their law so as to permit effective action against any act of infringement of intellectual property rights covered by this Agreement, including expeditious remedies to prevent infringements and remedies which constitute a deterrent to further infringements. These procedures shall be applied in such a manner as to avoid the creation of barriers to legitimate trade and to provide for safeguards against their abuse.

45 Vrijstelling refererend merkgebruik

46 Art. 14 lid 1 sub c Concept MRl The trade mark shall not entitle the proprietor to prohibit a third party from using, in the course of trade: c) the trade mark for the purpose of identifying or referring to goods or services as those of the proprietor of the trade mark, in particular where the use of the trade mark is necessary to indicate the intended purpose of a product or service, in particular as accessories or spare parts;…

47 EU Commission, p. 7 It is also considered appropriate to provide in Article 14(1)(c) for an explicit limitation covering referential use in general.

48 Wat is refererend merkgebruik?

49

50

51 Wijzigingsvoorstel Parlement specifieke opsomming van relevante gebruikshandelingen: i)is necessary to indicate the intended purpose of a product or service, in particular as accessories or spare parts; ii)is made in comparative advertising satisfying all conditions set forth in Directive 2006/114/EC; iii)is made to bring to the attention of consumers the resale of genuine goods that have originally been sold by or with the consent of the proprietor of the trade mark;

52 Wijzigingsvoorstel Parlement iv)is made to put forward a legitimate alternative to the goods or services of the proprietor of the trade mark; v)is made for the purposes of parody, artistic expression, criticism or comment;…

53 Maar zou het dan niet beter zijn om een horizontaal 'geldige reden'-verweer te introduceren?

54 Thank you Bird & Bird is an international legal practice comprising Bird & Bird LLP and its affiliated businesses.


Download ppt "Nieuw Europees merkenrecht: materieel Benelux Merken Congres 2014 Prof. dr. M.R.F. Senftleben Amsterdam, 10 april 2014."

Verwante presentaties


Ads door Google