Примери за използване на Earlier trade mark на Английски и техните преводи на Български
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
Genuine use of the earlier trade mark is not required.
Such a risk of confusion includes the risk of association with the earlier trade mark.
Paragraphs 1 to 4 shall apply where the earlier trade mark is a European Union trade mark. .
The likelihood of confusion includes the likelihood of association with the earlier trade mark.
(1) Upon opposition by the proprietor of an earlier trade mark, the trade mark applied for shall not be registered.
By decision of 8 February 2010, the Opposition Division rejected the opposition since there was no proof of use of the earlier trade mark.
Where there is an earlier trade mark as referred to in Article 8(2) and the conditions set out in paragraph 1 or 5 of that Article are fulfilled;
For the purposes of paragraph 1,“Earlier trade mark” means.
By decision of 14 July 2016, the PRV rejected the application for registration because of the likelihood of confusion between the sign and the earlier trade mark.
It was based on all the goods andservices covered by the earlier trade mark, inter alia‘Printed matter, newspapers, periodicals, directories' in Class 16.
In the absence of the proofs referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2,the application for a declaration of invalidity on the basis of an earlier trade mark shall be rejected.
The domain name‘pagesjaunes. com' was registered on 9 April 1996,well before the earlier trade mark, registered on 2 April 1999, on which the intervener based its opposition.
By decision of 14 July 2016, the Swedish registration office rejected the application for registration because of the likelihood of confusion between the sign and the earlier trade mark.
The Board of Appeal also considered the signs atissue to be similar, to the extent that the earlier trade mark was incorporated almost identically in the mark applied for.
Under Rule 22(3) of Regulation No 2868/95(the CTM implementing regulation),evidence of use must concern the place, time, extent and nature of use of the earlier trade mark.
According to OHIM, the earlier trade mark CITIBANK and the trade mark applied for(CITI) share the‘citi' component, aurally identical and also placed at the beginning of the marks in both cases.
According to the court, the purpose of the disclaimer was to make it clear that the exclusive right deriving from registration of the earlier trade mark did not relate to the terms referred to as such.
In the present case, registration of the earlier trade mark had been granted with such a disclaimer because the trade mark included a term that was descriptive of a geographical region,‘Roslags'.
The term‘Roslags' was now capable of registration in itself as a trade mark and was distinctive for the goods at issue in the present case, so thatit could even dominate the overall impression given by the earlier trade mark.
Because of its identity with, or similarity to, the earlier trade mark and the identity or similarity of the goods or services covered by the trade marks, there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public;
(B) where, because of its identity or similarity with the earlier mark and because of the identity or similarity of the goods orservices covered by the trade marks, there is a likelihood of confusion by the consumer on the territory in which the earlier trade mark is protected;
If it is identical with an earlier trade mark, and the goods or services for which the trade mark is applied for or is registered are identical with the goods or services for which the earlier trade mark is protected;
The Member States may permit that in appropriate circumstances registration need not be refused orthe trade mark need not be declared invalid where the proprietor of the earlier trade mark or other earlier right consents to the registration of the later trade mark. .
If the earlier trade mark has been used in relation to part only of the goods or services for which it is registered, it shall, for purposes of applying paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, be deemed to be registered in respect only of that part of the goods or services.
(c) where the application for a declaration of invalidity is based on Article 5(3) and the earlier trade mark did not have a reputation within the meaning of Article 5(3) at the filing date or the priority date of the registered trade mark. .
Community trade mark- Opposition proceedings- Application for Community word mark CITIGATE- Earlier national and Community word and figurative marks containing the element‘citi'- Relative grounds for refusal- Likelihood of confusion- Family oftrade marks- Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation(EC) No 207/2009- Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade mark- Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009.
The information and evidence to be produced in support of the use of an earlier trade mark shall comprise particulars of the location, duration, extent and nature of the use made of the earlier trade mark, and of its reputation and renown.
(A) if it is identical with the earlier trade mark and the goods orservices to which the registration applies are identical to the goods or services for which the earlier trade mark is protected;
Seniority shall have the sole effect under this Regulation that,where the proprietor of the EU trade mark surrenders the earlier trade mark or allows it to lapse, he shall be deemed to continue to have the same rights as he would have had if the earlier trade mark had continued to be registered.
As regards the effect of the disclaimer relating to the earlier trade mark on the outcome of the action, the PRV argued before that court that an element of a trade mark which has been excluded from protection by means of a disclaimer must in principle be regarded as not distinctive.