首页> 外文期刊>European intellectual property review >'Without Due Cause': Use of the Defendant's Sign Before the Claimant's mark is Filed-Leidseplein Beheer and de Vries v Red Bull GmbH and Red Bull Nederland BV (C-65/12)
【24h】

'Without Due Cause': Use of the Defendant's Sign Before the Claimant's mark is Filed-Leidseplein Beheer and de Vries v Red Bull GmbH and Red Bull Nederland BV (C-65/12)

机译:“无正当理由”:在索赔人的商标被提起之前使用被告人的标志-Leidseplein Beheer和de Vries诉Red Bull GmbH和Red Bull Nederland BV(C-65 / 12)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The Court of Justice of the European Union considered the meaning of "without due cause" under art.5(2) of Directive 2008/95. The CJEU provided that if the defendant's use of a sign in good faith predated the filing date of the claimant's mark, then the claimant may have to "tolerate" the defendant's use. Whether the claimant will have to tolerate that use is a question for national courts. The CJEU also set out three broad issues that national courts must take into account when assessing "without due cause ". This article discusses the treatment of "without due cause" and comments on the CJEU's ruling.
机译:欧洲联盟法院根据第2008/95号指令第5条第2款考虑了“无正当理由”的含义。欧洲法院规定,如果被告出于善意使用标志的日期早于原告商标的提交日期,则原告可能不得不“容忍”被告的使用。索赔人是否必须忍受这种使用是国家法院的一个问题。欧洲法院还提出了三个广泛的问题,各国法院在评估“无正当理由”时必须考虑这些问题。本文讨论了“无正当理由”的处理方式,并对欧洲法院的裁决发表了评论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号