Judgement of LG Frankfurt (Regional Court Frankfurt) of 12/08/2009, file number: 2-06 S 10/09

When a warned, for example of an offence against copyright, does not pay the warning costs of the opposing lawyers, these will normally demand the payment judicially. If the court finds the defendant guilty of such an offence, this must bear the claimed debit note.

Judgement of EuG (European Court of First Instance) of 30/09/2009, file number: T-75 / 08

Due to the claim of the enterprise JOOP!, the European Court of First Instance has decided that an exclamation sign cannot be registered as a community trademark. The company requested the registration of two community trademarks by the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM). The OHIM rejected the registration because of the lack of distinctiveness. For the consumer it is just an exclamation sign which is not written in an unusual way, it is only promoting and an eye-catcher.

Judgement of EuGH (European Court of Justice) of 10/09/2009, file number: C-366/08

The concept “low sugar jams” refers to the jams with the name “simple jam” and “extra jam” which sugar content is clearly reduced compared to the reference value of 60 %. “Extra jam” refers to products which sugar content is 58 % and they cannot be considered as low sugar products in terms of this regulation.

Decision of BPatG (Federal Patent Court) of 06/05/2009, file number: 29 W (pat) 96/07

The word-figurative mark “Double click” has no distinctiveness. The concept is a lexically provable specialist term, familiar in wide national business circles. The name is a describing statement, the concerning goods can be requested by double click, are offered in electronic form and can be accessible in that manner.

Decision of BPatG (Federal Patent Court) of 14/07/2009, file number: 33 W (pat) 121/07

The sentence “Nobody brings more people in the own 4 walls – Schwäbisch Hall” can be registered as a word mark. The first part of the slogan indicates that the building society describes itself as market leader. To find characteristic descriptions in the sentence, speculations and logical steps are needed. A description of the service fails within the slogan. The statement Schwäbisch Hall advises to a certain supplier and should not be understood as geographical information.

Decision of OGH (Austrian Supreme Court) of 20/05/2008, file number: 17 Ob 3/08b

Also the Austrian Supreme Court deals with the question whether the use of a brand as a Keyword in the advertisement on the hit lists of searching machines should be left to the trademark owner, the case has been presented to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary decision. Besides it is doubtful whether the danger of confusion could be excluded if the advertisement  is or is not performed in the hit list.

Judgement of EuG (Court of First Instance) of 30/06/2009, file number: T-435 / 05

The issue is whether the signs in question, which correspond to the title of a film, were used as trade marks prior to the date of application for registration of the Community trade mark, which has not been shown by the applicant. If the signs are use as a reference which is descriptive of the goods and some of the goods are also provided with other origin specification, this indicates the commercial origin of the same serie. If the sign, which is the action figure of characters from the film, is only used as a connection of a product with the film, this is only describing.

Judgement of LG Düsseldorf (Regional Court Dusseldorf) of 01/04/2009, file number: 12 O 277/08

The rights of a photography are not lost, according to § 72 paragraph 1 UhrG (Copyright Act), just because only a detail from the picture has been unjustified used. Protective property of the norm is also every part of the picture; in particular if it concerns the distinctive detail of the photograph. In addition, according to § 13 UhrG (Copyright Act), a surcharge of 100% of the basis reimbursement is entitled to the photographer if his name was not mentioned as originator.

Decisions of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) of 16/07/2009, file number: I ZB 53/07 and I ZB 55/07

The Federal Court of Justice has decided that Lego bricks may not be registered as a three-dimensional mark. On the squared shape cannot be based, because it concerns the basic shape of the product type and this cannot be protected. Also the knobs on the top of the brick cannot be trademark protected since their form serves merely the reaching of the technical effect (fitting together).

Press release of EuG (Court of First Instance) No. 60/09 about the judgement of 08/07/2009, file number: T-28 / 08

According to the Community Trade Mark Regulation, a trade mark which has no distinctiveness may not as a general rule be registered. However, such trade mark may be registered if it has acquired, in respect of the goods or services for which registration is sought, distinctive character following the use made of it. Nevertheless, the European judges in the First Instance denied in a current judgement this distinctiveness of the Bounty bar, necessary for the registration.

Decision of BPatG (Federal Patent Court) of 28/05/2009, file number: 25 W (pat) 70/08

The federal patent court had to decide whether the brand "Passion play" has, in the area of layout creations of web sites, enough distinctiveness for the, not only on the regional level but, worldwide known passion play which presents the popular dramatic representation of the life and death of Christ. The judges denied this because of the absent material relation of layout creations of the, in general widespread, image of the passion play. They were against a registration of the brand.

Decision of BPatG (Federal Patent Court) of 24/06/2009, file number: 24 W (pat) 78/07

The federal patent court had to decide whether the registered word mark and figurative mark "miro" which stands for hairdresser's goods like hair shampoo, hair tonic, setting lotion etc. injures the also registered brand "Miró" due to its resemblance. The judges recognised that both concepts are normally same emphasised and therefore a mistake would be conceivable. Since, however, the brand "Miró" stands for other products, namely for perfumeries and beauty care, they excluded a legal violation and therefore also a trade mark infringement.

Decision of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) of 11/02/2009, file number: Xa ZB 24/07

The Federal Supreme Court has decided, according to § 25 paragraph 4 PatG (Patent Act) that an inland representation can resignate of its mandate beyond pending proceedings towards the German Patent and Trade Mark Office (DPMA), even if no new inland representation is ordered.

Judgement of EuGH (ECJ) of 18/06/2009, file number: C-487 / 07

The advantage which arises from the use by a third of a sign which is similar to a known brand is an unfair exploitation of the distinctiveness or the esteem of the brand. This happens if this third party tries, through that use, to profit from the brand attraction, its name and its respect and to use, without financial consideration, the economic strains of the grantee of trademark to the creation and maintenance of the image of this brand.

Decision of BPatG (Federal Patent Court) of 20/04/2009, file number: 27 W (pat) 60/09

The concept "Travelling together" could not be registered at the German patent and trademark office as a trademark, since it has no distinctiveness. From the concept is understood, that the offered goods or services consist of travelling in or with a group of people. However, this is not enough for a trademark registration.

Judgement of LG Köln (Regional Court Cologne) of 16/06/2009, file number: 33 O 374/08

With an amount in dispute of 1 million euro, the regional court Cologne found StudiVZ "innocent". Facebook accused it of the imitation of the so-called "Look & Feel" on its homepage. StudiVZ served Facebook though as a model. Nevertheless and with limitations, the principle of the imitation freedom is valid, as long as this is not unfairly used. Finally Facebook, at the market launch of StudiVZ, did not have the necessary name recognition in Germany to justify any claim. Nor General Terms and Conditions offense is either given, since StudiVZ never...

Judgement of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) of 19/02/2009, file number: I ZR 195/06

The bid of the firmness is valid for the trademark with secondary meaning. In case of the claimed colour combination in a trademark with secondary meaning, the systematic order and the relation of the paints must be determined clearly and unambiguously...

Judgement of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) of 18/12/2008, file number: I ZR 200/06

The component "Puppenkiste" is in the company sign "Augsburger Puppenkiste" to label the marking of a puppet theatre originally weak sign and, therefore, without distinguishing characteristic to assert itself as a catchword-like advice to the company...

Judgement of OLG München (HRC Munich) of 30/04/2009, file number: 29 U in 4978/08

The copyright of a work is only cancelled with the final assignment of the use for the work. If the possibility of a renewed broadcast exists through a film, no final assignment is given. The name "Der Seewolf" is the German translation of the title of the novel "The Sea Wolf", however, does not hinder the distinctiveness because of different work kinds. Besides, it describes the filming of the novel as its central quality.

Decision of BPatG (Federal Patent Court) of 14/04/2009, file number: 25 W (pat) 8/06

The fixing of the object value in the brand-juridical cancellation proceedings is to be calculated according to the interest of the general public in the cancellation of the sign. If the affected brand is used, a higher value to be attached is measured, normally with 50,000€.  If the exact extent of the use of the affected brand is not known, no higher value can be settled.