[ 3-D Trademarks ]

Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2016. Case T-240/15. Grupo Bimbo, S.A.B de CV vs EUIPO

Summary: Grupo Bimbo filed a three-dimensional European Union trademark application for classes 5, 29 and 30. The examiner refused the Trademark application, since it was considered that it lacked distinctive character. The Board of Appeal ratified this decision. The EGC reminds that the main function of a Trademark is to identify a good origin, so that only those signs allowing to identify the goods for which protection is sought, providing it with a business origin, and thus, distinguishing them from those of other companies, can be registered. However, the applied Trademark does not allow to identify a concrete business origin, as it is not different from the common forms in the field. Consequently, the appeal lodged by Grupo Bimbo is rejected.

* Subject: European Unión Trademark.

According to the General Attorney Maciej Szpunar, it is appropriate to invalidate the European Union trademark represented by a Rubik’s cube shape.

In 1999 a three-dimensional community trademark under the shape of a Rubik’s cube was filed for three-dimensional puzzles. In 2006, Simba Toys, filed before the EUIPO an invalidation action against said trademark because it included a technical solution consisting in its rotating capacity. This application was rejected both by the EUIPO and the EGC. Last 25 May, the General Attorney Maciej Szpunar proposes that the EGC should annul its judgment and the EUIPO decision and reminds that a sign consisting in a product shape which only express a technical function, without adding non-functional distinctive elements, cannot be eligible for registration as a trademark, since it will substantively reduce the possibilities that the competitors introduced in the market product shapes including the same technical solution.

*Source: curia.europa.eu

[ Lolita Blu vs Manolo Blahnik ]

Lolita Blu withdraws three footwear models due to the claim by Manolo Blahnik. 

Manolo Blahnik demanded the company LOLITA BLU to cease selling three of their footwear models, as they were violating the famous designer’s Intellectual Property rights.

But, TO WHAT EXTENT LOLITA BLU MODELS WOULD BE A PLAGIARISM OF THE “HANGISI” MODEL?

Eva del Valle, PADIMA’s Legal Area Coordinator, in a new post of our blog, questions it from her professional perspective and throws this question concerning this piece of news: 

¿PLAGIARISM or DIFFERENT CREATION by Lolita Blu?

*Read post (in Spanish) at padima.es
*Source: el mundo.es
*Image: L. Lolita Blu Models – R. Manolo Blahnik Models
 

[ A Different Afternoon ]

“Innovative DNA: Technology, Science and Protection” 

Under the title “Innovative DNA: Technology, Science and Protection”, once again at PADIMA we have organized our special meeting A Different Afternoon, inviting, this time, Technology-Based Companies (TBCs). Companies that base their activity in the applications of new scientific or technological discoveries for the creation of new products, processes or services.

Among our guests, we enjoyed the presence and experience of Iluminada Rodríguez, manager and  R+D resp., and Ignacio Martín Gullón, partner of Applynano Solutions and UA professor; Cristina Vicens, CEO, and Mario Ivorra, CEO Assistant and CTO at Greenfarm Technology; Berenice Güerri, manager of Glen Biotech; Miguel Ángel Martínez, INESCOP vice-director;  Santiago Ambit, inventor and CEO at Weon Glasses; and Francisco J. García Technical Director at EMXYS.

Read more about our special A Different Afternoon (in Spanish only)…
 

[ Resale Prices Setting ]

It is not unusual that the manufacturer-provider requires the distributor-retailer not to resale the product under a determined price (minimum price) or sell it at a specific price (set price). In other words, it seems that the resale prices imposition is a common practice among companies. However, are we aware that we can be breaking the law as concerns the competition law point of view?

María Sanchiz, attorney at PADIMA, gives us some brief information on which the treatment that the law provides to the resale prices setting (in Spanish) is, in order to be able to determine if it is allowed or not the resale prices setting and, if so, which are the consequences of including this kind of practices in an agreement.

Read more (in Spanish)…
 

Although the relevant negotiations on the adaptation to the new scenario after the British citizens’ decision of leaving the European Union are still pending, the assumption is that this decision will affect the industrial property figures, like the Unitary Patent, the European Union Patent, the Community Design, the European Register of Plant Varieties or the domain name .eu.

We comment some of the expected consequences from the Brexit in terms of Industrial Property in our Blog:

BREXIT and its consequences in terms of Industrial Property in the European Union

AJEV. Young Entrepreneurs of Valencia Association awarded honorary mention to our Partner and Legal Area Director, Iván Sempere, in the young entrepreneur prizes gala 2016 (‪#‎PjeAEJV) and whose award received his eldest daughter.

#padimaprotects