This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
3D MARKS


According to German and European trademark law, it is possible to obtain trademark protection for the shape of a product or packaging by way of a 3D trademark.


Whereas Community trademark law allows trademark protection only by way of registration, in Germany protection by use in commerce is possible in addition to protection through registration, provided that the trademark has obtained a certain degree of market awareness.


Te legal criteria for the protection of a 3D trademark are the same as for other types of trademarks (word marks, figurative marks). However, and as a rule, consumers tend to perceive the shape of a product as a merely decorative element and not as a trademark. If the 3D trademark conforms to a shape commonly found in the particular market field, it may be necessary to prove that the trademark acquired distinctiveness through use (‘secondary meaning’). Depending on the circumstances, the applicant may or may not succeed with a 3D application. Te right holder should also consider obtaining design protection, which requires the 3D shape to have novelty and individual character.


In Germany, market surveys are the primary means of proving secondary meaning. Even rather common shapes may claim trademark protection if the results of the market survey show that a significant part of the relevant part of the public—which would, in respect of everyday products, be the average consumer— perceives the shape as a trademark. A successful example for such a 3D trademark is the round shape of the chocolate praline ‘Rocher’, made by Ferrero, which successfully withstood a request for invalidation, because the trademark holder could prove secondary meaning.


Market surveys are useful, and perhaps even necessary, to secure trademark protection at the national level on the basis of secondary meaning. When secondary meaning must be shown for a Community trademark because the 3D mark is not inherently distinctive, proof of acquired distinctiveness everywhere in the European Union will oſten not be available, or available only with extreme effort and expense, or even impossible to obtain, because the mark has not been used in every country of the EU. In case of Lindt & Sprüngli’s chocolate Easter bunny, well-known at least in Germany, the General Court of the EU denied trademark protection by way of a Community trademark for a 3D Easter bunny in a golden foil, not comprising further stylistic elements.


www.worldipreview.com


As regards 3D trademark applications, both under European and under German law, up to six different views of the sign can be submitted to the Office for Harmonization for the Internal Market (OHIM) or to the German Patent and Trademark Office. A single view may be sufficient, but it is recommended to provide the office with clear digital images or drawings representing the mark from different perspectives. An insufficient representation may actually lead to a refusal or, later, to a loss of rights and may also limit the scope of protection.


Most recent German case law concerns a 3D mark for a chocolate stick in the shape of a grapevine. Te trademark is a Madrid mark based on a French registration, with a single picture showing the mark. In the Netherlands, a cancellation request has been unsuccessful to date, but the trademark offices in the UK, Denmark and Sweden refused protection. Te German Federal Patent Court (contrary to the German Patent and Trademark Office), upon request of a third party under attack by the trademark holder in parallel infringement proceedings, ordered cancellation of the German part of the international registration (Madrid), arguing that the trademark infringed the principle of clarity of a trademark.


According to the Federal Patent Court, the representation of the trademark did not reveal the subject of protection properly. In particular, the representation did not provide any three- dimensional elements. According to the court, protection as a registered 3D trademark, in general, will require the filing of various representations showing the sign from different perspectives (at least if the sign is of a certain complexity). For simple signs one representation may suffice, provided that the quality of the representation is acceptable. In this case, the quality was not deemed acceptable, because the representation did not reveal the details of the sign. In particular, shape, orientation in space and stylistic elements remained unclear.


In a nutshell, 3D trademark protection of the mere shape of a product or packaging is available if the shape departs significantly from similar shapes for the same or similar products. If secondary meaning must be shown, this may be more easily achieved for a single country such as Germany than for the whole of the EU.


Scope of protection


Te scope of protection of a 3D trademark is not constant but is subject to change, always depending on the circumstances at the time that the rights in the mark are enforced. Te scope


World Intellectual Property Review Annual 2012 83


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180