Universele fosfor organische LED beschrijvend
Gerecht EU 2 mei 2012, zaak T-435/11 (Universal Display tegen OHIM (UniversalPHOLED))
Gemeenschapsmerkenrecht. Beschrijvend karakter.
De aanvrage van het merk woordmerk UniversalPHOLED wordt geweigerd door de onderzoeker omdat het teken een beschrijvende karakter heeft. Het onderdeel UNIVERSAL beschrijft de 'all-round application' en het onderdeel PHOLED is een acroniem voor 'phosphorescent organic light-emitting diode (LED). De kamer van beroep wijst het beroep af. Het aangevoerde middel: de kamer van beroep heeft blijk gegeven van een onjuiste opvatting bij de beoordeling van de mogelijkheid tot inschrijving van het aangevraagde gemeenschapsmerk "UniversalPHOLED" ( 7(1)(b) en (c)).
Het Gerecht EU stelt dat er geen fouten zijn gemaakt door de kamer van beroep en verwerpt het beroep: het beschrijvend karakter wordt bevestigd. Tenzij... there is a perceptible difference between the neologism or word and the mere sum of its parts, waarvan in dit geval geen sprake is.
18 A trade mark consisting of a neologism or a word composed of elements each of which is descriptive of characteristics of the goods or services in respect of which registration is sought is itself descriptive of the characteristics of those goods or services for the purposes of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009, unless there is a perceptible difference between the neologism or the word and the mere sum of its parts. That assumes that, because of the unusual nature of the combination in relation to the goods or services, the neologism or word creates an impression which is sufficiently far removed from that produced by the mere combination of meanings lent by the elements of which it is composed, with the result that the word is more than the sum of its parts. In that regard, the analysis of the term in question in the light of the appropriate lexical and grammatical rules is also relevant (see TRUEWHITE, paragraph 14 above, paragraph 16 and the case‑law cited).
29 Second, according to the case‑law cited at paragraph 18 above, a mark consisting of a neologism or word composed of elements, each of which is descriptive of the characteristics of the goods in respect of which registration is sought, is itself descriptive of the characteristics of those goods for the purposes of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009, unless there is a perceptible difference between the neologism or word and the mere sum of its parts. That assumes that, because of the unusual nature of the combination in relation to the goods, the neologism or word creates an impression which is sufficiently far removed from that produced by the mere combination of meanings lent by the elements of which it is composed, with the result that the word is more than the sum of its parts.
30 In the present case, it is clear that the mere combination of the words ‘universal’ and ‘pholed’, each of which is in itself descriptive of the type and nature of the goods in question, is itself also descriptive of the type and nature of those goods.
