Thus there you are in your company; an English speaking company operating daily in the English language, doing all your best, when suddenly you get a letter. The letter is from a French trademark lawyer advising you that a French company is the owner of a bound "trademark". Surprisingly, the corporate could be a French company, based in France and also the trademark is registered for the country of France, but the trademark itself is an English language phrase.
The letter goes on to tell you that the French company has found you using "not their trademark" however one they feel is "confusingly similar" on your websites in respect to your product, that happens to be in competition to a product of the French company. The letter thus provides you 48 hours to remove all references to the phrase, and, any alternative similar terms that could cause confusion. 1st the panic!! (would not we all) which is then followed by some research.
Your analysis leads you to the conclusion that the phrase you are using is truly generic and descriptive! You think "How may such a phrase get registration with the INPI (the French trademark Registrars)"? Your further research shows that the French company's trademark is also descriptive of their product and of the operation of the product!
Let me add here that article 711-two a), b) and c) of European Trademark Law states that a trademark cannot be registered is that the trademark could be a generic term or phrase, or if it describes the product or an operating feature of the product.
Starting to feel "a little safer", you then start to raise questions. But here comes the shock!
The INPI tell you that indeed in the English language the trademarked phrase is generic and additionally descriptive of the French company's product, but throughout the appliance to register the trademark, the examiner would have looked at the trademark with the French language in mind and so, grant the trademark as a result of in the French language, the English words of the trademark are not generic and may be descriptive of the product.
So your research goes additional and you come across the second shock!
The character of the internet means that bound terms, words and phrases automatically bridge country borders and by this, the prospect of trademark infringement is high. Wanting at the past judgments of the French court, you then notice that indeed, the French court has upheld the claims of French corporations claiming trademark infringement of this nature. Today, the past judgment rules are slightly modified to state that "if the product is aimed at the French individuals".
Going back to the letter received from the French lawyers, we have a tendency to can summarize things as follows:
A letter has been received concerning trademark infringement in respect to a trademark of a French company.
The trademark is registered in France and covers France.
The trademark is "in the English language", a generic term.
The trademark is "in the English language",descriptive of the French company's product.
The trademark appears in breach of Article 711-2, but achieved registration as a result of it had been in English and so held no that means within the French language.
The trademark infringement has been caused by the internet insofar because it bridges country borders.
French courts have seemingly past supported such infringement claims by French companies.
Therefore what's the position of the company that received the trademark infringement letter?
Firstly trying at Article 711-two, one may ask "of what use is this European agreement, if a country will ignore a clause as a result of of a language difference?". We tend to might additional assume "Is that this an open door for people to create money?".
Surely the company that received the trademark infringement letter would build a counter-claim to state that the trademark should not have achieved registration under article 711-2.
Then we have a tendency to would possibly ask:
If a French court were to support the registration and refuse the cancellation of the trademarked ENGLISH LANGUAGE PHRASE based upon "the term or section not being generic or descriptive within the French language." One might say that the French court refuses to allow that means to the words of the term or phrase being objected to.
And in this situation, with the trademarked English language phrase not holding any meaning, it could be urged that the claim of infringement may not be upheld, because to make a judgment on the point of "confusingly similar" the French court would need to acknowledge the which means of the words within the English language, and this would be against the decision taken within the claim for cancellation.
On the opposite hand:
If the French court accepted the meaning of the trademarked English phrase in terms of the English language and agreed that; the term infringing the trademark was in fact "confusingly similar."
Then it may be instructed that the court also settle for the cancellation of the trademark and so dismiss the infringement case on this time!
The law is changing into a lot of and additional advanced as global markets merge. But somewhere we should uphold sense!
Author Resource:
Adam has been writing articles online for nearly 2 years now. Not only does this author specialize in Logos in France - Emblems in Europe
You can also check out his latest website about
Dyson Vacuum Accessories Which reviews and lists the best
Dyson Attachments
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://www.look4articles.com/images/icon_Rss.png "XML Feed For RSS"){kind=icon}
Category Rss Feed
Print This Article
Add To Favorites
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://www.look4articles.com/images/rss.jpg "XML Feed For RSS")