For almost 15 years, our office was located in the Emerald House, in the shadow of the Okura Hotel. Everything was there: meeting rooms, comfy rooms, computers, standing desks, a photocopier, a rather psychedelic graffiti of a geisha in traditional Dutch costume and reasonable coffee. Yet slowly it was time for something new.
Read MoreContrary to what is generally assumed, copyright does not only apply to books, films, paintings and design objects. Everyday utensils (works of applied art) can also be protected by copyright.
Read MoreAt the beginning of this year, in the DOC/Dairy Partners judgment, the Supreme Court finally provided clarity with regard to the descriptive trade name: in such a case, additional circumstances are required for an injunction.
Read MoreThe sun was shining this summer, but not everywhere for the Korean company Hanwha. First some background information: any holder of a European patent must choose in advance in which countries he wants to enforce the patent.
Read MoreThis comes as no surprise: the figurative mark e*message is not a valid mark for electronic messages. It is entirely descriptive of the service. Apple successfully brought an invalidity action against this EU figurative mark registered in 2000.
Read MoreeasyCosmetic sells original A-brand cosmetic products whose trademark rights have been exhausted: they were put on the market in the European Economic Area (EEA) by or with the consent of the trademark holder.
Read MoreWhen can you, as a client, (whether or not together with your supplier) be considered a copyright holder? This question, among others, was the subject of discussion in a spicy case about the copyright on SM whips.
Read MoreSisvel is conducting numerous proceedings on patents of which it owns or manages the licensing portfolio. Some people call it Europe's biggest "patent troll." A what? Yes it is a peculiar word, wikipedia explains where it comes from.
Read MoreWhen is a trademark owner in bad faith when filing his trademark repeatedly? The General Court ruled on this issue in the case of Hasbro v. EUIPO. Hasbro had the trademark Monopoly registered several times. In 2019, EUIPO declared the mark partially invalid (for part of the goods and services), alleging that Hasbro had acted in bad faith when applying to register the mark. Hasbro appealed this decision, but the Board of Appeal and recently the General Court rejected it.
Read MoreThere is a rule in trademark law that descriptive indications may not be monopolized as trademarks. These designations must be kept free for everyone. For example, the word "Apple" cannot be a trademark for apples. Nor can Apple sue supermarkets and greengrocers for their use of the descriptive designation apple.
Read MoreOur partner Moïra Truijens has recently been appointed as .NL Domain Name Panelist at the WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) in Geneva.
Read MoreA significant win for producers of products protected as protected designations of origin (PDOs) or protected geographical indications (PGIs).
Read MoreThe Butcher vs. The Butcher Shop, The Baker vs. The Bakery: what can the owner of a descriptive trade name do against another company with a descriptive trade name? This question occupied many a lawyer with an interest in intellectual property law. The Supreme Court has now made a decision in its ruling in DOC Dairy Partners/Dairy Partners.
Read MoreSpring time! Chambers and World Trademark Review have just published their rankings. We are proud of their nice words about Hoogenraad & Haak. Some comments.
Read MoreGreat news: after an excellent student internship, Myrna Teeuw stayed with us as a paralegal.
Read MoreA stylised crocodile on children's clothing. Infringement of the Lacoste trademark or not? In the first instance, HEMA went unpunished; on appeal, Lacoste came out on top. The key question in the case is whether the public at large (you, me, everyone) perceives the image as a trademark. In other words: is it an indication of origin (according to Lacoste)? Or is it just an innocent decoration (according to HEMA)?
Read MoreThere is a rule in trademark law that descriptive indications may not be monopolised as trademarks. These indications must remain free for everyone to use. For example, the word "Apple" cannot be a trademark for apples.
Read MoreIn the Equivalenza judgment, the Court of Justice sets a new rule for assessing similarity between conflicting trade marks. The fact that the assessment is done in two stages is not new, only how to exactly do it. This new rule is important in any trademark conflict, both in oppositions and in infringement proceedings.
Read MoreA little background information: the winning party in intellectual property proceedings can be reimbursed a large part of its litigation costs (lawyer's fees). However, these costs must be predictable in advance of proceedings. Reimbursement has therefore long been restricted in copyright, trademark, design and trade name cases.
Read MoreSince the Picasso/Picaro judgment, we know that visual and aural similarity can be neutralised if the trademarks evoke different concepts. In the Wolf Oil/EUIPO judgment, the ECJ decided that neutralisation must take place at the end of phase 1, after assessing the degree of similarity at visual, phonetic and conceptual level.
Read More
