Red Bull Trademark: Red Bull: Colour CTM under Fire
servicemarks | 3. September 2007 — Red Bull's famous can enjoys extensive trademark protection. The name, the double bull device, the background des…
Yet another colour CTM cancellation action On the face of it, Red Bull and Deutsche Telekom have only little in common. While the incumbent former telecoms monopolist struggles hard to reverse the trend of a steadily declining clientele, Red Bull's sales of its Energy Drink have been growing at a breathtaking pace. When it comes to trade marks, however, they face a similar problem. Both companies are owners of colour trademarks consisting of two colours (CTM 000212753 for Deutsche Telekom, and CTM 002534774 for Red Bull), and both colour trademarks are being attacked on the grounds that they do not meet the criteria set by the Community Trademark Regulation, more specifically Art. 4 of the Regulation, which reads as follows, A Community trade mark may consist of any signs capable of being represented graphically (...). and Art 7 , according to which 1. The following shall not be registered: (a) signs which do not conform to the requirements of Article 4 One may wonder why these marks have been registered in the first place, if they do not conform to these requirements However, as mentioned earlier, the troubles for owners of colour trademarks are fairly new. They stem from a 2004 decision by the ECJ, which ruled, in respect of abstract colour marks consisting of two or more colours, that a graphic representation consisting of two or more colours, designated in the abstract and without contours, must be systematically arranged by associating the colours concerned in a predetermined and uniform way." Trademark owners all over Europe have been asking themselves what to make of this. Whilst they were still thinking, some malevolent competitors have filed invalidity actions: XL Energy Marketing Sp. z o.o. and Boost Drinks Ltd. in the case of Red Bull, O2 - one of Germany's big four mobile telecoms network operator - in the case of Deutsche Telekom. While Red Bull's competitors seem to haven an own interest in using the colours for their products, O2's motivation appears to be purely altruistic. Its corporate colour has been navy blue ever since it took over the former network operator VIAG Interkom. The prevailing question in the briefs exchanged by the parties before the OHIM seems to be whether the conditions for registration of a mark have to be met at the time of registration only, or whether a subsequent change in the interpretation of the law (the Community Trademark Regulation), triggered by the much-discussed Heidelberger judgment in the instance, shall affect the validity of the registration. The law offers no clear guidance: Article 51: Absolute grounds for invalidity 1. A Community trade mark shall be declared invalid on application to the Office or on the basis of a counterclaim in infringement proceedings, (a) where the Community trade mark has been registered contrary to the provisions of Article 7 (...) The parties are now fighting over whether the marks…
» Vollständiger ArtikelErschienen 4. September 2007 auf http://servicemarks.blogspot.com/.
servicemarks | 3. September 2007 — Red Bull's famous can enjoys extensive trademark protection. The name, the double bull device, the background des…
servicemarks | 5. September 2007 — Lately, there has been an interesting inflation of EM 2008 marks registered in Germany. It offers an insight into a highly interes…
servicemarks | 20. September 2007 — ...and rules on the prevalence of European provisions relating to the use requirement. After a few less inspiring judgments, the E…
German American Law Journal :: American Edition | 26. Juli 2009 — CK - Washington. Despite the fact that an unregistered trademark is used in Germany, a conflicting mark may be registered with t…
servicemarks | 5. September 2007 — Ferrero files cancellation against UEFA's EM 2008 mark It looks as if Ferrero, a maker of chocolates (i.a. kinder products), has …
servicemarks | 26. September 2007 — ECJ reverses CFI's decision to deny Nestlé's QUICKY bunny registration on relative grounds - but nothing is decided yet. In its j…
MarkenBlog | 15. Januar 2006 — Die WIPO zu zukünftigen Aufgaben im Markenbereich: Issues for Future Work At its previous meeting in April of this year, …
German American Law Journal :: American Edition | 21. Dezember 2006 — KR - Washington. Spam EMails violate various German statutes. Most commonly, a cause of action is based on the Unfair Competitio…
Visae Patentes | 11. Juni 2010 — US CAD company Autodesk's efforts to monopolise the ".dwg" file extension via a pending US “DWG” word mark application (No. 78 85…
German American Law Journal :: American Edition | 17. Juli 2011 — CK - Washington. The German Supreme Court in Karlsruhe ruled on the question of trademarks used in search engine advertising sea…