TITLE

Dutch Supreme Court Tripp Trapp children's chair cases

AUTHOR(S)
Koenraad, Hidde
PUB. DATE
December 2013
SOURCE
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice;Dec2013, Vol. 8 Issue 12, p909
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
In three infringement cases, the Dutch Supreme Court (DSC) delivered judgments with significant implications for the (assumed) European harmonization of the copyright protection criteria for works of applied arts. Further, in the Hauck case, the DSC referred questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) about the interpretation of the absolute grounds for the refusal (or invalidity) of shape marks, in particular the ‘nature of the goods’ and the ‘substantial value’ grounds in Article 3(1)(e)(i) and (iii) of Directive 2008/95 on the approximation of trade mark law, corresponding to Article 7(1)(e)(i) and (iii) of Council Regulation 207/2009 on the Community trade mark (CTMR). These two topics are the focus of this case note.
ACCESSION #
92603536

 

Related Articles

  • The EU Court of Justice Upholds the AstraZeneca Condemnation for Misusing Patent Law Procedures. Giannino, Michele // Journal of European Competition Law & Practice;Aug2013, Vol. 4 Issue 4, p317 

    The EU Court of Justice (EUCJ) rejects the AstraZeneca appeal, substantially confirming the rulings of the Commission on the misuse of patent law procedures, and also clarifies in which situations making use of such procedures may result in a competition infringement.

  • Abraxis : new pharmaceutical formulations and Article 3(d) SPC Regulation. Signoroni, Stella Altea // Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice;Jul2019, Vol. 14 Issue 7, p511 

    Abraxis Bioscience LLC v Comptroller General of Patents , Case C-443/14, Court of Justice of the European Union, 21 March 2019 The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that a marketing authorization (MA) granted for a new formulation of an old active ingredient cannot be considered the...

  • Requirements governing lawful keyword advertising–MOST Pralines (Most-Pralinen).  // Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice;Sep2013, Vol. 8 Issue 9, p729 

    The article discusses a conflict of law on keyword advertising with regard to a judgment by the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) and its interpretation by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). It states that in January 2007, the plaintiff sued the defendant for placing an...

  • The Law on Fines Imposed in EU Competition Proceedings: The Ever-Increasing Reach of Settlements. Serre, Eric Barbier de La; Lagathu, Eileen // Journal of European Competition Law & Practice;Oct2019, Vol. 10 Issue 8, p505 

    No abstract available.

  • Community design: prior in time, stronger in right. Sciaudone, Riccardo // Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice;Jun2012, Vol. 7 Issue 6, p401 

    The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) has clarified that the holder of a registered Community design is entitled to bring infringement proceedings against any third party, including the holder of a later Community design registration, without having first to request the declaration of...

  • Pending Cases Before the Court of Justice of the European Union.  // European State Aid Law Quarterly;2013, Vol. 12 Issue 1, p202 

    The article discusses the pending cases at the European Union Court of Justice as of January 15, 2013. It states the failure to fulfil obligations on the aid granted by Spain to companies in the Magefesa group under the infringement of Article 288 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European...

  • Farmers who do not comply fully with protected variety use obligations held to be infringers of such rights. Würtenberger, Gert // Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice;Jan2013, Vol. 8 Issue 1, p17 

    While farmers may make use of a protected variety without the consent of the rights holder, as provided by Regulation 2100/94 on Community Plant Variety Rights, farmers who do not comply with the obligations arising out of this privilege are regarded by the Court of Justice of the European Union...

  • Compliance Costs—Breaking Seals in European Commission Investigations. Rab, Suzanne // Journal of European Competition Law & Practice;Apr2013, Vol. 4 Issue 2, p139 

    The Court of Justice of the EU has dismissed an appeal against a European Commission decision fining E.ON €38 million for breaking a seal during an EU competition inspection.

  • The Enforcement Directive and invalidation procedures: an unsurprising negative verdict. Barazza, Stefano // Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice;Apr2013, Vol. 8 Issue 4, p274 

    In this preliminary ruling, the court clarifies that the provisions of Directive 2004/48, interpreted in light of the TRIPS Agreement and the Paris Convention, concern only the enforcement and infringement of intellectual property rights and cannot be applied to an invalidation procedure...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics