TV Formats with copyright protection in Italy

italian-flag-640

The Italian Supreme Court has issued a decision that some TV formats can take advantages of copyright protection.

As it is well-known many countries around the world don’t acknowledge specific copyright protection for TV formats mainly because they don’t fit well in the definition for such protection.

In the Italian case, however, the court considers these formats as eligible for copyright protection if they can meet some requirements such as identification of the structural elements of the story, as well as its space and time collocation, the main characters and the main thread of the plot. In addition, the structure must be repeatable and possessing at least a modicum of creativity.

More information here.

Source: IP Kat.

Advertisements

Ferrari can lose its Testarossa trademark in Germany

model-car-2093994_960_720The Italian sports cars manufacturer Ferrari is on the way to lose its rights over the trademark Testarossa in Germany, which was been used in the past for one of its famous cars.

In the case at hand, the German company Autec AG filed an application for trademark Testarossa for bicycles. Against this application, an opposition was filed by Ferrari which in turn provoked a request for revocation of the mark based on alleged non-use of the mark for 5 consequence years.

According to the Court in Düsseldorf Ferrari failed to prove a genuine use of its trademark. All piece of evidence for after-sales and maintenance of the car was rejected because the used brand was only Ferrari.

Most likely the Italian company will appeal this decision.

Source: Lexology.

 

 

VESPA, motorcycles and T-shirts in a lawsuit in Italy

4cdebebaed018af28162717238eddb6a

IP Kat reports about an interesting case in Italy regarding trademark infringement.

The case concerns T-shirts bearing the image of the well-known Italian motorcycle VESPA but without using the mark itself.

In Italy a trademark infringement can be sanctioned under the Criminal law, according to which:

“1. Except in cases of joint liability covered by Article 473, anyone who introduces into the territory of the State, in order to make a profit, industrial products bearing trade marks or other distinctive signs, whether national or foreign, that are counterfeited or altered, is punished with imprisonment between 1 and 4 years, and a fine between EUR 3,500 and 35,000.
2. Except in cases of joint liability in the counterfeiting, alteration, introduction into the territory of the State, anyone who is in possession for the sale, starts selling or otherwise circulates, in order to make a profit, the products mentioned above sub paragraph 1 is punished with imprisonment up to 2 years and a fine up to EUR 20,000.
3. The delicts sub paragraphs 1 and 2 are punishable upon condition that internal laws, EU regulations and international conventions on the protection of intellectual and industrial property are observed.”
The defendant stated that there is a lack of infringement because the mark wasn’t been put on the T-shirts but only the motorcycle.
In contrast with this, however, the Supreme court ruled that there is an infringement because in this particular case the consumers are quite aware of this motorcycle and even without labelling a trademark on the T-shirts there is a possibility for a confusion regarding the origin of the good in question.
For more information here.

Magical trademarks – an EU General court decision

The General Court ruled in cases Cases T-565/15 and T-566/15, which concern an attempt for registration of a word mark MERLIN’S KINDERWELT and a figurative mark

untitled

for Class 41 “education and providing of training, entertainment and amusement games, sporting and cultural activities, providing children’s playgrounds and amusement parks, theatre productions, providing information on entertainment and education, entertainment or education club services, publication of books and text, other than publicity texts, correspondence courses, arranging and conducting conferences and seminars, organisation of exhibitions for cultural or educational purposes, organisation of shows, organisation of games and competitions (education or entertainment)“.

Against these marks an opposition was filed by the Italian company Ferrero based on earlier Italian trademarks KINDER for Classes 30 and 41.

In contrast with the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, the court considers the words MERLIN’S and KINDERWELT as non-descriptive and signs owing an average degree of distinctiveness. The main reason for that conclusion is that the relevant public in Italy will not perceive their  meaning which is created through their connection in one phrase.

In addition to that, according to the court, there are no dominant element in the later marks which as a whole are visually and phonetically dissimilar. Moreover there is no conceptional similarity due to the lack of meaning for the relevant public.

Source: Marquess Class 46.

 

 

Proof of trademark rights before OHIM – important clarification.

attest_authorize_award-512The European Court ruled in Case T‑135/14, Kicktipp GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Società Italiana Calzature Srl.

A German company filed application for an EU trademark Kicktipp for cloths etc.

Against this mark was filed an opposition from an Italian company based on an earlier mark Kickers for cloths too.

OHIM upheld the opposition, the decision about which was appealed. One of the argument for this was the fact that the Italian company submitted only renew application for its trademark without registration certificate.

According the Court this is not sufficient to prove existing rights. Rule 19 of EU Regulation 2868/95 (which covers opposition filings) requires providing “both the registration certificate and the renewal certificate”.

Moreover, according to the Court both marks in general are not similar to the extent to create consumer confusion.

Source: WIPR.

Italy adopted an opposition system for registration of trademarks – Италия прие опозиционната система за регистрация на марки

Marques Class 46 съобщава новината, че от 1 май 2011 година, в Италия се въвежда така наречената опозиционна система за регистрация на марки.
До момента италианското Патентно ведомство проверяваше за наличие на по-ранни права на интелектуална собственост. При наличие на такива права, съответната заявка за марка получаваше отказ.
Срокът за експертиза беше до 2 години.
В бъдеще Патентното ведомство няма да осъществява такава експертиза. Всеки притежател на по-ранни права може да ги защити, като подаде опозиция срещу по-късната заявка за марка.
По този начин от Патентното ведомство се надяват да намалят срока за получаване на регистрация на максимум 6 месеца.
Прави впечатление че Патентните ведомства в Европа лека полека приемат опозиционната система за регистрация на марки. В началото на март месец 2011 и българското Патентно ведомство направи това.
Повече информация може да откриете тук.

English version

Marques Class 46 reported the news that from May 1, 2011, in Italy will be introduced the so-called opposition system for registration of trademarks.
Until now, the Italian Patent Office examine the presence of earlier intellectual property rights. In the presence of such rights, the trade mark application was refused.
The period for examination was within 2 years.
In the future, the Patent Office does not make such an examination. Each holder of earlier rights can protect them by submitting opposition to the later trade mark application.
Thus, the Patent Office hope to reduce the time limit for obtaining registration of up to 6 months.
It is noteworthy that the patent offices in Europe slowly accept opposition system for registration of trademarks. At the beginning of March 2011, the Bulgarian Patent Office did it too.
More information can be found here.

A revocation of a well-known mark DAMIANI for non use in Italy – yes but not – Отмяна на общоизвестна марка поради неизползване в Италия- да ама не

The IP Chamber of the District Court of Milan наскоро излезе с едно изключително интересно решение относно съдебно дело за заличаване на общоизвестна марка за стоки за които тя не е била използвана за период по-голям от 5 последователни години.
Случаят касае общоизвестната марка DAMIANI регистрирана и използвана в Италия от компанията Damiani International за стоки свързани с бижутерия. Компанията притежава и още една италианска марка DAMIANI регистрирана в клас 25- дрехи.
Холандската компания Creative Brands, която е част от Peek & Cloppenburg притежава европейска марка DAMIANI за 25 клас.
Creative Brands искат отмяна на марката на Damiani International за 25 клас поради факта, че тя не е била използвана реално.
Съдът счита, че репутацията на една марка не само повишава нейната степен на закрила, но и представлява защита за стоки обхванати от регистрацията, за които марката не е била използвана.
Тази допълнителна защита не включва автоматично всички възможно стоки и услуги, а само тези които дават потенциална възможност на компанията да разшири логически своя бизнес следвайки установената практика в съответния сектор на икономиката.
Според решението на съда Damiani Internationa използва своята общоизвестна марка за бижутерия но е възможно и прието за този вид бизнес марката да бъде използвана и в модната индустрия за дрехи.
Поради това съдът отхвърля искането за отмяна на регистрацията на марка DAMIANI поради неизползване.
информация на Marques Class 46.

English version

The IP Chamber of the District Court of Milan recently issued a very interesting decision on a lawsuit for revocation of a well-known trademark for goods for which it has not been used for a period of more than 5 consecutive years.
The case concerns a well-known mark DAMIANI registered and used in Italy by Damiani International Company for goods related to jewelry. The company owns and another Italian brand DAMIANI registered in Class 25 – clothing.
The Dutch company Creative Brands which is part from Peek & Cloppenburg has a European trademark DAMIANI for Class 25.
Creative Brands wanted annulment of Damiani International’s mark for the class 25 because it was not used.
The Court considers that the reputation of a mark not only increases its degree of protection but also a protection for the goods covered by the registration for which the mark was not used.
This additional protection does not automatically include all possible products and services, but only those which give potential for the company to expand its business logic following the practice in the sector of the economy.
According to the decision of the court, Damiani Internationa use its well-known trademark for jewelry but it is possible and accepted for such brands to be used in the fashion industry for clothing.
Therefore, the court rejected the request for revocation of a registration for non use.
information Marques Class 46.