Why is the Functionality Doctrine in Trade Mark Law worth Advanced (Re)Consideration?

Make a Submission

PDF

Keywords

trade marks
functionality
public interest
US law
competition
products’ substitutability

How to Cite

Brancusi, L. (2020). Why is the Functionality Doctrine in Trade Mark Law worth Advanced (Re)Consideration?. Contemporary Central & East European Law, (1 (133), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.37232/cceel.2019.04

Abstract

This article considers the necessity of preparing a comprehensive study, over absolute refusal grounds pertaining to functional signs set in the EU trademark law, which would meet the business community’s need to register non-traditional trade marks. The study aims to define the exact scope of the aforementioned exclusions through objective criteria that can render them a workable tool, distinct from refusal grounds pertaining to distinctiveness, and able to solve problems of overlapping rights. As its specific research methodology, the study adopts comparative results coming from the US trade dress functionality doctrine, and a specific input offered from a ‘law and economics’ perspective, including competition rules related to market definition and substitutability of products.

https://doi.org/10.37232/cceel.2019.04
PDF

References

Bernatt M, Jurkowska-Gomułka A, Skoczny T, ‘Zakaz nadużywania pozycji dominującej’ [Prohibition of abuse of Dominant Position] in M Kępiński (ed), Prawo konkurencji [Competition Law] (CH Beck 2014).

Brancusi L, ‘Alternative Products as a Factor to Determine the Functionality of Trade Marks – How the Criteria from the US Functionality Doctrine Could be Applied in the EU Law?’ in S Frankel (ed), Is Intellectual Property Pluralism Functional? (Edward Elgar Publishing 2019).

Brancusi L, ‘Assessing the Impact of Registering Non-Traditional Marks in the EU Law: A Competition Law Analysis’ in I Calboli, M Senftleben (eds), The Protection of Non-Traditional Marks: Critical Perspectives (OUP 2018) <https://global.oup.com/academic/product/theprotection-of-non-traditional-trademarks-9780198826576?cc=pl&lang=en&>accessed 25 Feb 2020.

Brancusi L, ‘Funkcjonalność techniczna i estetyczna jako przeszkoda rejestracji’ [Technical and Aesthetic Functionality as a Registration Impediment] in R Skubisz (ed), Znaki towarowe i ich ochrona [Trade Marks and Their Protection] (CH Beck 2019).

Calboli I, ‘The Role of Comparative Legal Analysis in Intellectual Property Law: From Good to Great?’ in G Dinwoodie (ed), Methods and Perspectives in Intellectual Property (Edward Elgar 2013).

Calboli I, Senftleben M (eds), The Protection of Non-Traditional Marks: Critical Perspectives (OUP 2018), <https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-protectionof-nontraditional-trademarks-9780198826576?cc=pl&lang=en&>accessed 25 Feb 2020.

Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark [2009] OJ L 78/1.

Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark [1994] OJ L 11/1.

Desai D, Lianos I, Waller S (eds), Brands, Competition Law and IP (CUP 2015).

Dinwoodie G, Janis M, Trade Dress and Design Law (Aspen Publishers, Wolters Kluwer 2010).

Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks [2015] OJ L 336/1.

Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks [2008] OJ L 299/25.

Fhima I, ‘The Public Interest in European Trade Mark Law’ (2017) IPQ 4.

First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks [1989] OJ L 40/1.

Judgement of CJEU, C-833/18 EU:C:2020:461.

Judgement of CJUE C-163/16 EU:C:2018:423.

Judgement of CJUE C-21/18 EU:C:2019:199.

Judgement of CJUE C-395/16 EU:C:2018:172.

Judgement of the CJUE C-299/99 EU:C:2002:377.

Judgement of the CJUE C–48/09 EU:C:2010:516.

Kur A, ‘Absolute Grounds for Refusal’ in A Kur, M. Senftleben, with a contribution by V. von Bomhard, European Trade Mark Law: A Commentary (OUP 2017).

Kur A, ‘Unité de l’Art is Here to Stay – Cofemel and its Consequences’ (2019) Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition Research Paper 19-06, <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3500845> accessed 25 Feb 2020.

Miąsik D, Stosunek prawa ochrony konkurencji do prawa własności intelektualnej [The Relationship Between Competition Law and Intellectual Property Law] (Wolters Kluwer 2012).

Moir H, Palombi L, ‘Patents and Trademarks: Empirical Evidence on ‘Evergreening’ from Australia’ (paper presented at 4th Asia-Pacific Innovation Conference at National Taiwan University in 2013), <https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/11418?mode=full> accessed 25 Feb 2020.

Opinion of the CJUE in case C–205/13 EU:C:2014:322.

Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of March 20, 1883; 21 UST 1583, 828 UNTS 305.

Podrecki P, ‘Porozumienia ograniczające konkurencję’ [Agreements Restricting Competition] in M Kępiński (ed), Prawo konkurencji [Competition Law] (CH Beck 2014).

Ramirez-Montes CJ, ‘Louboutin Heels and the Competition Goals of EU Trade Mark Law’ (2019) RIPL 19(1) 38–63, <https://repository.jmls.edu/ripl/vol19/iss1/2/> accessed 25 Feb 2020.

Regulation (EU) 2015/2424 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark and Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 on the fees payable to the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) [2015] OJ L 341.

Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark [2017] OJ L 154/1.

Reitzig M, ‘Strategic Management of Intellectual Property’ (2004) MIT SMR <https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/strategic-management-of-intellectual-property/> accessed 25 Feb 2020.

Rosati E, ‘The Absolute Ground for Refusal or Invalidity in Article 7(1)(e)(iii) EUTMR/4(1)(e)(iii) EUTMD: In Search of the Exclusion’s Own Substantial Value’ (2020) JIPLP 15(2), 103–122, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpz157.

Senftleben M, ‘A Clash of Culture and Commerce: Non-Traditional Marks and the Impediment of Cyclic Cultural Innovation’ in I Calboli, M Senftleben (eds), The Protection of Non-Traditional Marks: Critical Perspectives (OUP 2018) <https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-protection-of-non-traditional-trademarks-9780198826576?cc=pl&lang=en&> accessed 25 Feb 2020.

Senftleben M, ‘Impact on Competition Law: Monolithic Copyright, Market Power and Market Definition’ in KC Liu, RM Hilty (eds), Remuneration of Copyright Owners: Regulatory Challenges of New Business (Springer 2017).

Skubisz R, ‘Znaki towarowe i ich ochrona (refleksje ogólne)’ [Trade Marks and Their Protection (General Considerations)] in R Skubisz (ed), Znaki towarowe i ich ochrona [Trade Marks and Their Protection] (CH Beck 2019).

Skubisz R, Prawo z rejestracji znaku towarowego i jego ochrona. Studium z zakresu prawa polskiego na tle prawnoporównawczym [Trade Mark Rights and Their Protection. Study of the Polish Law against Comparative Legal Background] (Stowarzyszenie Naukowe Pro Scientia Iuridica 2018).

Suthersanen U, ‘Excluding Designs (and Shape Marks): Where is the EU Court of Justice Going?’ (2019) IIC 50.

Szczepanowska-Kozłowska K, ‘Bezwzględne przeszkody rejestracji znaku towarowego’ [Absolute Refusal Grounds to a Trade Mark Registration] in R Skubisz (ed), Prawo własności przemysłowej [Industrial Property Law] (CH Beck 2017).

Tischner A, ‘W ekosystemie ochrony własności intelektualnej’ [Within the Ecosystem of the Intellectual Property Protection] in A Adamczak (ed), 100 lat ochrony własności przemysłowej w Polsce. Księga jubileuszowa Urzędu Patentowego [100 Years of Industrial Property Protection in Poland. Liber amicorum of the Patent Office] (Wolters Kluwer 2018).

Tischner A, Kumulatywna ochrona wzornictwa przemysłowego w prawie własności intelektualnej [The Cumulative Protection of Industrial Design in the Intellectual Property Law] (CH Beck 2015).

TRIPS: Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, April 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, 1869 UNTS 299, 33 ILM 1197.

The author transfers the copyright to the article to the Publisher, which publishes the scientific journal in the Open Access model (licensed under Creative Commons CC 4.0_BY).