In the universal human language
OHIM, Cancellation Division, 14 maart 2011, 000003833 C, Procter & Gamble Prestige tegen Debonair Trading International LDA (met dank aan Henriëtte van Helden en Tobias Cohen Jehoram, De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek).
Merkenrecht. De omvang van het aantal OHIM-uitspraken is zodanig dat volledig publicatie ondoenlijk en de relevantie van de uitspraken is vaak zondanig dat volledige publicatie ook nog eens ongewenst is. Een zaak die verwijst naar een Nederlands vonnis en ook nog eens een aantal mooie passages bevat, verdient bij uitzondering wel publicatie.
De onderhavige beslissing betreft de vernietiging van het beeldmerk lippenstiftafdruk (kiss print)voor o.a. parfum (zie ook: Vzr Rechtbank ’s-Gravenhage, 15 september 2009, IEF 8184 (Debonair /Naomi Campbell). De Cancellation Division wijst de vernietiging toe voor klasse 3 (parfum e.d.), onder andere omdat kussen een vrij algemeen bekend begrip is in the universal human language, wat weer eens wat anders is dan een verwijzing naar een lemma in de Van Dale.
(52) It has already been considered to be a commonly known fact that the contested sign symbolises a kiss. It is also commonly known that the concept of a kiss may be used, in images and words, to symbolise human feelings or communicative acts having in common the gesture of touching the lips. This is namely the act of kissing, which in the universal human language is aimed at expressing love and affection, as well as a cordial or passionate greeting.
(55) Indeed, if a lipstick kiss print, particularly the one represented in the contested CTM, can evoke seduction, sensuality and love, these feelings essentially coincide with the reasons why many persons, particularly young women, buy and use the products at issue: namely to enhance their physical appearance, to look their best, to fee1 as self-confident as possible, and thus to be (more) attractive, that is, sensual and seductive. For this reason, advertising for cosmetics products have constantly made reference to these concepts.
(56) The Cancellation Division concludes that the representation of a kiss not only constitutes a commonplace decorative concept, used or capable of being used in many sectors for presenting goods and services of various kinds (see paragraphs 35 to 41, above), but also conveys a clear and specific laudatory message in connection with the relevant goods. From the viewpoint of the relevant consumers, the contested CTM conceptually represents a promotional indication of beauty, seductiveness and the enhanced appearance or scent that such goods provide, rather than a sign identifying their commercial origin. The nature of such message would be considered clear and would be understood by the relevant public without any particular mental exertion.
(65) As shown by the national decision produced by the applicant (Exhibit 11), a dispute brought by the CTM proprietor in the Netherlands was in fact decided by a ruling that one of the parties had used an analogous device as a mere embellishment, thereby excluding likelihood of confusion. However, this also proves that the CTM proprietor may at any time oppose its sign to any decorative use made by competitors, and even win the cases, in spite of that decorative use, as far as it manages to show that its device holds an autonomous distinctive position within any other similar sign. This tends to confirm that a sign having a common decorative and promotional use - which for this very reason could hardly be differentiated from variations on it, due to consumers' imperfect recollection of signs - should be primarily reconsidered in view of its conformity with the absolute grounds for refusal under the CTMR.
Lees de beslissing hier.
