RECOMMENDATION ON MEASURES TO SAFEGUARD FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Similar documents
Recommendation on Measures to Safeguard Freedom of Expression and Undistorted Competition in EU Trade Mark Law

C L I P European Max-Planck Group for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property

Business Immigration. Brexit and the EU Settlement Scheme. December 2018

Guidelines2day Roadshow for professional representatives. Programme. European Patent Academy. supported by

RE PALESTINE S DECLARATION UNDER ARTICLE 12(3) OF THE ROME STATUTE

CURRICULUM VITAE. Institutional Address: Institute for Philosophy of Language (IFL-FCSH-UNL). Av. de Berna, 26-4º piso Lisbon, Portugal

Second Tier Cities in Age of Austerity: Why Invest Beyond the Capitals?

EU-CHINA INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR ON TRADEMARK LAW. João Miranda de Sousa Head of IP

Invoking freedom of expression and freedom of competition in trade mark infringement disputes: legal mechanisms for striking a balance

First European Workshop for Junior Researchers in IP law. University of Leuven, Belgium. June 9 to 10, 2016

SECOND TIER CITY REGIONS IN EUROPE: WHAT POLICY MESSAGES FROM & FOR EUROPE?

Protection of trademarks and the Internet with respect to the Czech law

Summary Report. Question 245. Taking unfair advantage of trademarks: parasitism and free riding

Proposal for a new repartition key

PROPOSALS FOR CREATING UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

Contributors. Sonia Morano-Foadi and Micaela Malena Downloaded from Elgar Online at 12/22/ :03:49AM via free access

Europe-wide patent protection and the competence of the Unified Patent Court

8118/16 SH/NC/ra DGD 2

The Senior Consumer. The Institute of Food, Medicine and Nutrition October David Donnan. A.T. Kearney October

EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 22 June 2007 (OR. en) 2003/0168 (COD) C6-0142/2007 PE-CONS 3619/07 JUSTCIV 140 CODEC 528

(1) END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT

Explanatory Report to the European Convention on the Exercise of Children's Rights *

IS 2016 THE FINAL STRETCH BEFORE THE ENTRY IN FORCE OF

Brexit. Alan V. Deardorff University of Michigan. For presentation at Adult Learning Institute April 11,

having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2013)0161),

Q&A on the European Citizens' Initiative

epi-ceipi Basic Training in European Patent Law

Victims & Corporations

COMMUNITY TRADE MARK ORDER 2014

CONVENTION on the law applicable to contractual obligations (1) opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980

THE ENLARGEMENT OF THE UNION

The life of a patent application at the EPO

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

Recent Developments of the Bulgarian Trademark Legislation and Practice

EU Immigration Policy and International Protection: EU Joint Border Control and International Obligations

REBELS WITH A CAUSE? PARLIAMENTARY RESILIENCE IN EUROPEAN AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 12 December 2012 (OR. en) 2011/0093 (COD) PE-CONS 72/11 PI 180 CODEC 2344 OC 70

Adopted text. - Trade mark regulation

Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters in Europe

Call For Views: Modernising the European Copyright Framework

LABOR MIGRATION AND RECOGNITION OF QUALIFICATIONS

Principles for Conflict of Laws in Intellectual Property

OECD expert meeting hosted by the Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research Oslo, Norway 2-3 June 2008 ICTs and Gender Pierre Montagnier

Question 1. Feedback Week 1 - Quiz. You submitted this quiz on Sat 17 May :55 PM MYT. You got a score of out of

The. Trademark Reporter. The Law Journal of the International Trademark Association. Celebrating. January February, 2011 Vol. 101 No.

EU-China Workshop on Trademark Law

EU Main economic achievements. Franco Praussello University of Genoa

Common ground in European Dismissal Law

ECTA European Communities Trade Mark Association

BRIEFING. International Migration: The UK Compared with other OECD Countries.

The EU Visa Code will apply from 5 April 2010

QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE PATENT SYSTEM IN EUROPE. 1.1 Do you agree that these are the basic features required of the patent system?

ISSUE BRIEF: U.S. Immigration Priorities in a Global Context

Study on Trade Secrets and Parasitic Copying (Look-alikes) MARKT/2010/20/D

Transitional Measures concerning the Schengen acquis for the states of the last accession: the cases of Bulgaria and Romania.

Modelling the PRocesses leading to Organised crime and TerrOrist Networks

Notes on the Application Form for a Declaration of Invalidity of a European Union Trade Mark

World Jewish Population

Early job insecurity in Europe The impact of the economic crisis

The German Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (GRUR)

MANAGING COMPETITION LAW RISK

Unitary patent and Unified Patent Court: the proposed framework

Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION

EEA and Swiss national. Children and their rights to British citizenship

IS THE SWEDISH MODEL HERE TO STAY?

2. The table in the Annex outlines the declarations received by the General Secretariat of the Council and their status to date.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 23 February 1999 *

Explanatory Report to the European Convention on Social and Medical Assistance and Protocol thereto *

Client Alert. Rome II and the Law Applicable to Non-Contractual Obligations. Introduction

European Scientific Journal July 2014 edition vol.10, No.19 ISSN: (Print) e - ISSN

UNDER EMBARGO UNTIL 9 APRIL 2018, 15:00 HOURS PARIS TIME

Explanatory Report to the Interim Agreements concerning Social Security Schemes *

Question Q204P. Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement

Council of the European Union Brussels, 22 September 2014 (OR. en)

WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. WHO framework convention on tobacco control

Interim Agreements concerning Social Security Schemes. Explanatory Report

Economics Level 2 Unit Plan Version: 26 June 2009

INTEGRATION OF IMMIGRANTS INTO THE LABOUR MARKET IN EU AND OECD COUNTRIES

Programme. Programme. The Law Against Unfair Competition in the New Member States: An Impetus for Europe?

by Margarethe Wiersema and Marie Louise Mors

Brexit Paper 4: Civil Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments

INVESTING IN AN OPEN AND SECURE EUROPE Two Funds for the period

Council of the European Union Brussels, 28 October 2015 (OR. en)

World Jewish Population

EBI Global Annual Conference on Banking Regulation. Call for Papers. An event jointly organised with Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main, Germany

MEM-TP October Rome-Italy. Funded by the European Union in the frame of the EU Health Program ( )

DUALITY IN THE SPANISH LABOR MARKET AND THE CONTRATO EMPRENDEDORES

EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS. PhD, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2005;

Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION

Criminal liability of legal persons

European Young Co-operators Network italian meeting at Expo

ESF and Research Integrity. Marja Makarow Vanessa Camp0-Ruiz

MEMO/08/778. A. Conclusions of the report. Brussels, 10 December 2008

Winners and Losers of Globalisation. Agenda. Torino, Italy November, Collegio Carlo Alberto Piazza Arbarello Torino Italy

32000R1346 OJ L 160, , p (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, 1. Council regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings

IP Case Law Conference

First Council Directive

NATIONAL URBAN POLICY FORUM

Regulating Political Parties

Dr Nengye Liu, Hobart, 6 July The European Union and Conservation of Marine Living Resources in Antarctica

Transcription:

RECOMMENDATION ON MEASURES TO SAFEGUARD FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND UNDISTORTED COMPETITION IN EU TRADE MARK LAW The Signatories, Emphasizing that, whatever the protection afforded to trade marks, it must always be balanced against general interests, in particular the fundamental freedom of expression and the guarantee of undistorted competition; Recognizing that the need for an appropriate balance is inherent in trade mark law and is an issue of particular importance in the light of ongoing technological, economic and social developments; Pointing out that in order to achieve an appropriate balance, the legitimate interests of trade mark proprietors, consumers, competitors and the public at large must be taken into account at all stages by legislators, trade mark registration offices and courts, meaning in particular that: - the grant of trade mark rights should not of itself confer a competitive advantage apart from the establishment of an exclusive link with a sign that can be used to distinguish goods and services in the marketplace and obtain a reputation. This principle must be respected independently of the kind of sign and the ground for refusal invoked; - the analysis of trade mark infringement must proceed not solely from the perception of the target public but must, as appropriate, take into account other normative aspects, such as the interests of competitors and the public to keep the sign available; - a fundamental distinction must be drawn between situations in which a trade mark is used to indicate the commercial origin of goods or services that do not originate from the trade mark proprietor and situations in which a mark is used to identify goods or services as those of the trade mark proprietor or to designate goods or services that are legitimately commercialized in the EU. In the latter situations, use of the mark should only be held to infringe the mark where it is manifestly unfair; - the burden of proving the existence, or absence, of conditions relevant to the establishment of trade mark infringement must be distributed appropriately between claimant and defendant, taking into account the equal importance of trademark protection on the one hand and freedom of expression and freedom of competition on the other. Believing that these measures are of a mandatory nature, deriving from overarching fundamental principles embodied in the Lisbon Treaty, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights; Recognizing that the existing law already contains certain flexibilities to balance trade mark protection against freedom of expression and freedom of competition and that these flexibilities have, to some extent, been used by courts and that room for such flexibilities must continue to exist;

Recommending nevertheless that, for the purposes of clarification, legal certainty and uniform implementation of these flexibilities in all Member States, certain free uses should be expressly secured in the envisaged new EU trade mark legislation, in particular: - political and artistic use, including use for the purposes of criticism, comment and parody; - use for the purpose of reporting current events; - use resulting from the exhaustion of trade mark rights, including use relating to the offering of goods or services in respect of trademarked products on downstream markets; - use in advertising that allows consumers to compare goods or services, informs consumers about alternative offers in the marketplace, or that brings the resale of trademarked goods to the attention of consumers; - use of a sign or indication that is descriptive in the language of any Member State even if the sign or indication also enjoys protection as part of, or in connection with, a national trade mark; - use of all kinds of signs which should remain free to prevent trade mark protection from granting its proprietor a monopoly on functional product characteristics of a technical or aesthetic nature which consumers are likely to seek in the products of competitors, such as use of signs resulting from the nature of goods or services, being necessary to obtain a technical result, or giving substantial value to goods or services. Recommending that, in order to keep pace with technological developments and to allow the adaptation of the law to changing circumstances, an open-ended clause should be added to the provision on limitations which allows courts to develop appropriate new defences on a case-by-case basis in circumstances where the purposes, objectives and fundamental principles underlying the existing legislation warrant permitting third party use notwithstanding the lack of an express limitation. The application of this open-ended clause should not be pre-empted by the existence of more specific limitations. Its scope must not be confined to non-commercial use; Recommending that any legislative requirement for flexibility tools, such as limitations, to be exercised in accordance with honest practices, should not be applied in a way that erodes their effectiveness. In particular, the honest practices requirement must leave room for courts to enter into a balancing of all rights and interests at stake. It must not consist of a repetition of infringement criteria that brings protection interests into focus.

SIGNATURES Initiator of the Recommendation: Martin Senftleben Professor of Intellectual Property and Director, Kooijmans Institute for Law and Governance, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands Group of experts contributing to the drafting of the Recommendation and first Signatories: Pernille Bruun Andersen Lionel Bently Michele Bertani Robert Burrell Mireille Buydens Vincenzo Di Cataldo Giovanni Cavani Estelle Derclaye Graeme Dinwoodie Séverine Dusollier Dev S. Gangjee Researcher, Centre for Information and Innovation Law, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Professor of Intellectual Property and Director, Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom Professor of Intellectual Property Law, University of Foggia, Italy Professor of Law, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom, and University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia Professor, L Université Libre de Bruxelles, and Attorney, Brussels, Belgium Professor of Commercial Law, University of Catania, Italy Professor of Commercial Law, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy Professor of Intellectual Property Law, School of Law, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom Professor of Intellectual Property and Information Technology Law, and Director, Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre, University of Oxford, United Kingdom Professor of Intellectual Property, SciencesPo, Paris, France, and University of Namur, Belgium Associate Professor in Intellectual Property Law, University of Oxford, United Kingdom

Christophe Geiger Gustavo Ghidini Jonathan Griffths Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan Paul van der Kooij Annette Kur Nari Lee David Llewelyn Luigi Mansani Timo Minssen Ansgar Ohly Alexander Peukert Marco Ricolfi Ole-Andreas Rognstad Associate Professor, Director General and Director of the Research Department, Centre for International Intellectual Property Studies, University of Strasbourg, France Professor of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, University of Milan and Luiss University Rome, Italy Reader in Intellectual Property Law, School of Law, Queen Mary, University of London, United Kingdom Lecturer and Fellow at King s College, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom, and External Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich, Germany Associate Professor of Intellectual Property Law, Leiden Law School, University of Leiden, The Netherlands Senior Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich, and Honorary Professor, University of Munich, Germany Professor of Intellectual Property Law, Department of Accounting and Commercial Law, HANKEN School of Economics, Helsinki, Finland Professor of Intellectual Property Law, Dickson Poon School of Law, King s College London, United Kingdom Professor of Commercial Law, University of Parma, Italy Associate Professor, Centre for Information and Innovation Law, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Professor of Civil Law, Intellectual Property and Competition Law, University of Munich, Germany Professor of Civil Law and Commercial Law, University of Frankfurt/Main, Germany Professor of Industrial Law, University of Turin, Italy Professor, Department of Private Law, University of Oslo, Norway

Thomas Sambuc Paolo Spada Marco Saverio Spolidoro Jens Schovsbo Paul Torremans Luigi Carlo Ubertazzi Adriano Vanzetti D.W. Feer Verkade Dirk Visser Katja Weckström Raquel Xalabarder Łukasz Żelechowski Attorney, Stuttgart, and Honorary Professor of Intellectual Property Law, University of Tübingen, Germany Professor (emeritus), La Sapienza University, Rome, Italy Professor of Intellectual Property, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy Professor, Centre for Information and Innovation Law, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Professor of Intellectual Property Law, School of Law, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom Professor of Industrial Law, University of Pavia, Italy Professor (emeritus), Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy Attorney-General (retired) to the Supreme Court of The Netherlands, Professor (emeritus), University of Nijmegen, University of Leiden and University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands Professor of Intellectual Property, Leiden Law School, University of Leiden, The Netherlands Professor of Commercial Law, UEF Law School, University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu, Finland Professor of Intellectual Property, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain Assistant Professor, Department of Intellectual Property Law, Faculty of Law and Administration, University of Warsaw, Poland