Your Subscription

We would like to ensure that you are still receiving content that you find useful – please confirm that you would like to continue to receive ILO newsletters.





Login
Twitter LinkedIn




Login
  • Home
  • About
  • Updates
  • Awards
  • Contact
  • Directory
  • OnDemand
  • Partners
  • Testimonials
Forward Share Print
Danubia Patent and Law Office LLC

Non-registrability of descriptive names

Newsletters

11 January 2021

Intellectual Property Hungary

Decisions
Comment


A Hungarian applicant filed the combination word mark ECUMENICAL WORLDMUSIC FESTIVAL in Classes 35, 41, 43 and 45. The mark referred to a religious music event.

Decisions

The Hungarian Intellectual Property Office (HIPO) rejected the application, referring to the European Court of Justice's (ECJ's) Biomild judgment (C-265/00), which held that the combination of several elements which are not distinctive does not result in a distinctive sign. However, a non-distinctive sign can acquire distinctiveness. In this respect, the HIPO referred to the ECJ's Chiemsee judgments (C-108/97 and C109/97), which define the conditions for acquiring distinctiveness, and held that the documents filed by the applicant were insufficient to prove the distinctiveness acquired.

The applicant requested a review by the Metropolitan Tribunal, but this was unsuccessful. The tribunal held that the registration of non-Hungarian words must be refused if their Hungarian meaning is not distinctive. This is the standard approach demonstrated in the case law of the Supreme Court (3. Pk. 23.534/2017).

Comment

The applicant's arguments were twofold:

  • The applied-for mark was distinctive, as the Hungarian public would not understand the English world combination. As a result, the mark was distinctive in Hungary.
  • If the mark was not distinctive per se, it had acquired distinctiveness through use.

The HIPO examined and rejected both of the applicant's arguments. As the Metropolitan Tribunal examined only the first argument (ie, distinctiveness), it is likely that the applicant filed the request for review only in respect of this argument.

The Metropolitan Tribunal made it easy for itself by referring to Supreme Court case law. Arguably, this case law was correctly applied by the tribunal, since the wording of the mark was English, a language understood by many Hungarians. The same approach may apply for applied-for marks written in German, but is unlikely to apply for marks filed in French, Spanish or Polish.

The second argument (ie, lack of acquired distinctiveness) was examined only by the HIPO, which referred to the following finding of the ECJ:

In assessing the distinctive character of a mark in respect of which registration has been applied for, the following may also be taken into account: the market share held by the mark; how intensive, geographically widespread and long-standing use of the mark has been; the amount invested by the undertaking in promoting the mark; the proportion of the relevant class of persons who, because of the mark, identify goods as origination from a particular undertaking; and statements from chambers of commerce and industry or other trade and professional associations (Paragraph 51).

For further information on this topic please contact Alexander Vida at Danubia Patent & Law Office LLC by telephone (+36 1 411 8700) or email (vida@danubia.hu). The Danubia Patent & Law Office LLC website can be accessed at www.danubia.hu.

The materials contained on this website are for general information purposes only and are subject to the disclaimer.

ILO is a premium online legal update service for major companies and law firms worldwide. In-house corporate counsel and other users of legal services, as well as law firm partners, qualify for a free subscription.

Forward Share Print

Author

Alexander Vida

Alexander Vida

Register now for your free newsletter

View recent newsletter

Today's articles

  • Federal Court of Appeal upholds Federal Court decision finding Shire's VYVANSE patent valid - Canada
  • Refill products infringe trademark - Austria
  • Supreme Court weighs in on fair use and finds that Google's use of Java SE API is fair - USA
  • Supreme People's Court issues judicial interpretations on IP rights disputes which involve ISPs - China
  • Barcelona Court of Appeal confirms legitimacy of Tommy Hilfiger's use of TH sign - Spain

More articles

More from this firm

  • Lack of distinctiveness of word combination
  • Deception and bad faith in trademark applications
  • Likelihood of confusion decision draws on ECJ case law
  • Every claim of opposition must be examined
  • Hungarian authorities deem device mark SPIRIT to be misleading

More articles

  • Home
  • About
  • Updates
  • Awards
  • Contact
  • My account
  • Directory
  • OnDemand
  • Partners
  • Testimonials
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Follow on LinkedIn
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy policy
  • GDPR Compliance
  • Terms
  • Cookie policy
Online Media Partners
Inter-Pacific Bar Association (IPBA) International Bar Association (IBA) European Company Lawyers Association (ECLA) Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC) American Bar Association Section of International Law (ABA)

© 1997-2021 Law Business Research

You need to be logged in to make a comment. Log in here.
Many thanks. Your comment has been sent.

Your details



Your comment or question *