Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!

Jocelyn Bosse reported on a recent decision of the Federal Court of Australia concerning the honest concurrent use of a trade mark. The court was asked to decide whether the American artist Katy Perry was liable for trade mark infringement and whether the trade mark “KATIE PERRY” registration should be cancelled. The case highlighted the importance of the specification of goods or services and a possible co-existence agreement.

Katfriend Nedim Malovic (ASSA ABLOY) commented on a recent decision of the EU General Court concerning a figurative trade mark held by Chiquita. The Court found that the combination of primary colours was not capable of distinguishing goods in Classes 31 (fresh fruits and vegetables) and 32 (fruit juices) of the Nice Classification. The Court also concluded that Chiquita Brands had failed to demonstrate that its mark had acquired a distinctive character across the entire territory of the European Union.

Marcel Pemsel looked into a judgment of the Higher Regional Court of Nuremberg concerning the exhaustion of a Turkish trade mark that enjoys protection in the EU, inter alia, for ‘coffee’. The Court questioned whether the trade mark rights in the imported goods were exhausted under Art. 15 EUTMR. For a detailed analysis of the decision, read our Kat’s post here.

Anastasiia Kyrylenko discussed the EU design reform, Regulation (EU) 2024/2822, and Directive (EU) 2024/2823. The recent reform includes updated definitions for terms such as “design” and “product.” Do not forget to check our Kat’s post for a detailed review of the updated articles and key points.

Image courtesy: Seher Moya