4.3.2.1: Principles

Search the content

Table of Contents

Whether a sign as such is registrable as a trade mark must be assessed from the perspective of the relevant public.[1] The assessment of the perception of the average consumer must be specific, taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances.[2] In a first step of the examination, the relevant public must therefore be determined. In any case, the relevant public includes the public that is likely to use the product in accordance with its intended purpose.[3] In addition, all customers and interested parties of the product are likely to be relevant.[4]
The most important differentiation in practice is whether the products claimed under the trade mark are intended only for specialised circles[5] or (also) for all consumers. [6] A specialised public will devote particular interest and attention to the signs in question and often has specialised knowledge.[7] In most cases, case law assumes that both specialised circles and the general public can be considered as addressees:
Toiletries, soaps,[8] perfume,[9] cosmetic products,[10] toothpaste,[11] cleaning products,[12] motor vehicle accessories,[13] hand-operated tools and appliances,[14] loudspeakers,[15]electronic devices such as computers,[16] household appliances as well as electric cleaning devices with steam operation and high-pressure cleaners are at least also aimed at the general consumer, [17] lighting,[18] weedkillers and insecticides,[19] spectacles,[20] precious metals,[21] luxury watches,[22] musical instruments,[23] paper and stationery,[24] software,[25] phonograms,[26] printed matter,[27] furniture,[28] glassware,[29] leather goods and travelling bags,[30] towels, bedspreads and linen,[31] clothing,[32] women's shoes and women's bags,[33] toys,[34] beverages,[35] food supplements and medical products[36] and food[37] including baby food,[38] financial services,[39] insurance services,[40] real estate affairs,[41] telecommunication services,[42] vehicle rental,[43] transport,[44] travel organisation[45] or catering services,[46] education, training and sporting and cultural activities,[47] organisation of seminars,[48] patent attorney services[49] or beauty and health care services[50]. Goods such as paints,[51] building materials[52] and connectors and associated plastic insulating parts are aimed at both the general consumer and specialised circles.[53] The same applies to lighting devices[54] or shower sets.[55] Commercial packaging materials - such as a sausage casing - are initially aimed at specialised circles, but indirectly also at the general public.[56] The same applies to vehicle seats, which are not only installed by professionals, but also by professionally supported amateurs. [57] In the case of lottery games, with the exception of consumers who categorically reject gambling, all consumers come into consideration.[58] In the case of cinematographic services, a distinction must be made.[59] Employment agency services are used both by businesses and by the job-seeking public.[60] Finally, in the case of prescription[61]medicines, the case law of the CJEU and the BGH diverges in detail. Even in the case of prescription-only medicinal products, the CJEU wants to take into account not only doctors or pharmacists but also the end consumer, because the latter also influences the decision on the choice of medicinal product.[62] However, since the end consumer will hardly ever have a large number of confusable medicinal products at home or otherwise determine the choice of medicinal product, the BGH - probably more correctly - relies decisively on the opinion of the prescribing doctors and pharmacists, who are responsible for selecting the medicinal product with the necessary care.[63] Furthermore, the circles involved in the distribution of medicinal products must also be taken into account.[64] Finally, surgical and medical apparatus and instruments may, in specific cases, be aimed at both healthcare professionals and end consumers.[65] Pharmacy services, on the other hand, are aimed at the general public.[66]
Only a few products are aimed exclusively at professionals:
For example, specialised circles are addressed by trade marks in the fields of chemistry,[67] biology,[68] certain electronic devices for commercial use,[69] vehicle steering systems,[70] wind energy generators,[71] metalworking,[72] packaging and insulating materials and fire and insulation panels,[73] market research, management consultancy and marketing,[74] technical consultancy,[75] goods transport services,[76] training and further training events for certain specialised circles[77] or scientific and industrial research.[78] Products that are only used in medical operations are also aimed exclusively at specialised circles.[79]
Finally, a special feature applies to products aimed at children. These are usually purchased by their parents or other adults, so that the focus should be on them.[80]
It can also be important whether only end customers or also intermediaries are included in the relevant public. With regard to the origin function of the trade mark,[81] the perception of consumers or end users generally plays a decisive role. However, depending on the characteristics of the market for the product in question, the influence of intermediaries on purchasing decisions and thus their perception of the trade mark must also be taken into account.[82]
When it comes to products intended for all consumers, the average informed, reasonably observant and circumspect consumer is to be assumed as the relevant public.[83] The previously relevant 'fleeting' consumer is then no longer relevant.[84]
For example, labelling '6-grain eggs' is not misleading. The informed, attentive and reasonable average consumer does not assume that the hens are only fed 6-grain feed and that the eggs sold have special qualities.[85]
It must be taken into account that the average consumer rarely has the opportunity to make direct comparisons between different trade marks, but must rely on the imperfect image he has of them in his mind.[86]
The consumer's attention may vary depending on the type of goods concerned.[87] However, certain marketing concepts - such as sales at particularly high prices - are not taken into account because they may be subject to change.[88] Rather, it is the wording of the list of goods and services[89] that matters.[90]
For example, although the public's attention to product labelling for clothing will vary depending on its type and value, it will generally reach at least an average level.[91] The same applies to sound recordings[92] and to children's food because of the wide range of products on offer.[93] Consumers are also no more than averagely attentive to electrical household and cleaning appliances[94] or services in the areas of travel, transport or cultural and scientific events.[95] Consumers are also averagely attentive to detergents and cleaning products, perfumery and leather goods[96] and footwear.[97] In contrast, the public is only slightly attentive to consumer goods such as household cloths.[98] Wine attracts average attention,[99] while high-proof alcoholic beverages such as rum tend to attract more attention.[100] The same applies respectively to goods made of precious metals, which are obtained at longer intervals and on the basis of close inspection.[101] Devices such as computers also attract more attention.[102] In the case of vehicles, the degree of attention of the relevant public is particularly high at the time of purchase due to the nature of the goods and, in particular, their price and their highly technical nature.[103] The same applies respectively to obtaining jewellery[104] or luxury watches.[105] The same applies to rather high-priced goods such as furniture,[106] electrical appliances,[107] high-quality loudspeakers,[108] musical instruments[109] or agricultural machinery.[110] Even in the case of building materials, the GC - probably somewhat too optimistically - considers the public to be particularly attentive.[111] The public is also normally well informed and particularly attentive when purchasing medicines for serious illnesses.[112] The public pays a higher degree of attention to prescription medicines in particular.[113] Because of the effects on appearance and well-being, the GC also applies these principles to food supplements and products for body and beauty care.[114] The same should also apply to contact lenses,[115] spectacles,[116] but also to welding equipment[117]because these can cause damage to health. Finally, case law pays particular attention to real estate affairs[118] and - insofar as professional circles are addressed - to advertising[119]. The same is likely to apply in the financial and insurance sectors[120] or for advice on patent law[121].
As a rule, it will not be necessary to differentiate between online and offline purchasers in the case of internet offers. This is because even vis-à-vis persons who have never made a purchase on the internet, the internet offer at least has the effect of a catalogue and is therefore also aimed at this public.[122]
Whether the public recognises a trade mark as a descriptive indication or abbreviation must be assessed on the basis of the trade mark itself. The content of the list of services cannot be used to determine the perception of the public. The public does not know the list of goods.[123]
The abbreviation 'ECR', which is ambiguous in many directions, therefore does not become descriptive simply because the term 'Efficient Consumer Response' is used in the list of goods.[124]
The degree of attention in particular[125] and the effect of a trade mark on the consumer in general[126] cannot, as a matter of fact, be assessed by the CJEU, whose jurisdiction is limited to questions of law. However, whether and to what extent the average consumer is a real consumer or a so-called normative consumer - i.e. a fictitious consumer conceived for legal assessment - has been and is the subject of intense debate.[127] What is certain is that an expert opinion does not have to be obtained or a consumer survey commissioned for the assessment, but can in any case be obtained if special circumstances exist.[128] The BGH also grants the trial judge broad powers in determining the perception of the public based on his own expertise and life experience. In principle, there are no different requirements for the affirmation and denial of a particular perception of the public.[129] In practice, therefore, it is usually the opinion of the trial judge that determines the perception of the public, at least[130] if there is no need to rely on specially trained experts.[131] But even if the judge does not belong to the relevant public, he may have the necessary empirical knowledge for the assessment.[132] The type of evidence is only to be reviewed in the appeal instance as to whether the trial judge has exhausted the procedural material without procedural error and has made his assessment of the perception of the public free of opposition with the laws of thought and experience.[133] The same applies respectively in appeal proceedings before the Federal Court of Justice.[134]
In practice, the decision-maker - i.e. the official or the judge of last instance - will regularly take his own perception as the basis for his judgement.[135] However, because the average decision-maker considers himself to be above-averagely informed, attentive and understanding, he will make certain deductions.[136] If a man makes a decision while the perception of the public by women is at issue, he will usually ask women in his circle of well-knownness and relatives; a woman may seek male advice. If a young public is in demand, children come into play. It is only in the case of trade marks aimed at specialist circles that the judgement of the decision-maker and his environment fails.
The pragmatic approach of asking what the decision-maker himself or his direct environment thinks of the matter will often deliver much better results than any dogmatic approach. If the decision-maker knows the trade mark under attack, there is a good chance of proving the well-knownness of the trade mark. On the other hand, a trade mark that the judge does not know (although he is smarter than the average consumer) will hardly ever enjoy protection of well-known marks.

Footnotes

  1. Constant case law, for example: CJEU C-104/01 v. 6.5.2003 Libertel, ref. 45; CJEU C-329/02 P v. 16.9.2004 SAT.2, para. 24; CJEU C-404/02 of 16 September 2004 Nichols, para. 23; CJEU C-107/03 P of 23 September 2004 Form of soap, para. 29; CJEU C-136/02 P of 7 October 2004 Mag Instrument, para. 19; CJEU C-64/02 P of 21.10.2004 DAS PRINZIP DER BEQUEMLICHKEIT, ref. 43; CJEU C-353/03 of 7.7.2005 Nestlé, ref. 25; CJEU C-37/03 P of 15.9.2005 BioID, ref. 28 and 48; CJEU C-173/04 P of 12.1. 2006 Deutsche SiSi-Werke, ref. 25; CJEU C-24/05 P of 22 June 2006 Storck I, ref. 23; CJEU C-25/05 P of 22 June 2006 Storck II, ref. 25; CJEU C-144/06 P of 4 Oct. 2007 Red and white rectangular tablet with a blue oval centre, ref. 35; CJEU C-238/06 P of 25 October 2007 Develey, ref. 79; CJEU C-304/06 P of 8 May 2008 Eurohypo, ref. 67; CJEU C-494/08 P of 9 December 2009 Prana Haus, ref. 26; CJEU C-398/08 P of 21 January 2010 Audi, ref. 34; CJEU C-265/09 P of 9 September 2010 OHIM/BORCO-Marken-Import, ref. 32; CJEU C-217/13 of 19 June 2014 Oberbank, ref. 39; CJEU C-417/16 P of 4 May 2017 August Storck, ref. 39. 4.5.2017 August Storck, ref. 32; CJEU C-139/16 of 6.7.2017 Moreno Marín, ref. 24; CJEU C-26/17 P of 13.9.2018 Birkenstock Sales, ref. 31; CJEU C-541/18 of 12.9.2019 AS, ref. 20; CJEU C-783/18 P of 12 December 2019 EUIPO/Wajos, para. 23; CJEU C-456/19 of 8 October 2020 Aktiebolaget Östgötatrafiken, para. 32; EFTA Court E-5/16 of 8 April 2017 Municipality of Oslo, para. 139; for an exception to this principle, see CJEU C-48/09 P of 14 September 2010 Lego Juris, ref. 75 f.; CJEU C-205/13 of 18 September 2014 Hauck/Stokke, ref. 33 f. and § 4 ref. 190 below.

    ↩

  2. CJEU C-541/18 of 12 September 2019 AS, ref. 21; CJEU C-456/19 of 8 October 2020 Aktiebolaget Östgötatrafiken, ref. 33.

    ↩

  3. BGH I ZR 51/03 of 16 March 2006 Seifenspender, ref. 13; GC T-430/07 of 29 April 2009 MONTEBELLO RHUM AGRICOLE/MONTEBELLO, ref. 20.

    ↩

  4. BGH I ZB 53/05 of 13 March 2008 SPA II, ref. 18.

    ↩

  5. See for example GC T-222/02 of 23 November 2003 ROBOTUNITS, ref. 36 f.; GC T-311/02 of 20 July 2004 LIMO, ref. 28; also BGH GRUR 2004, 240, 241 MIDAS/medAS.

    ↩

  6. GC T-67/08 of 11 June 2009 InvestHedge/HEDGE INVEST, ref. 33; on the relevant public if, in a case of conflict, one trade mark with a broad generic term is also aimed at all consumers, while the other with a narrow generic term is only aimed at professionals: GC T-126/03 of 14 July 2005 ALADDIN/ALADIN, ref. 80 f.

    ↩

  7. GC T-224/01 of 9 April 2003 TUFFTRIDE/NU-TRIDE, ref. 52; GC T-317/01 of 30 June 2004 EURODATA TV/M+M EUROdATA, ref. 52; GC T-211/03 of 20 April 2005 NABER/Faber, ref. 24; in this sense probably also GC T-147/03 of 12 January 2006 Quantième/Quantum, ref. 62.

    ↩

  8. GC T-156/01 of 9 July 2003 GIORGI/GIORGIO AIRE, para. 65; GC T-162/01 of 9 July 2003 GIORGI/GIORGIO BEVERLY HILLS, para. 35; GC T-93/06 of 19 June 2008 SPA/MINERAL SPA, para. 28; GC T-184/07 of 26 November 2008 ANEW ALTERNATIVE, para. 28. 2008 ANEW ALTERNATIVE, ref. 23; see also BGH I ZR 51/03 of 16 March 2006 Soap Dispenser, ref. 13; GC T-150/08 of 11 November 2009 Clina/CLINAIR, ref. 33, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-22/10 P of 27 October 2010 REWE Central.

    ↩

  9. GC T-93/06 of 19.6.2008 SPA/MINERAL SPA, ref. 28; GC T-184/07 of 26.11.2008 ANEW ALTERNATIVE, ref. 23; GC T-104/08 of 5.5.2009 Zerstäuberform, ref. 22; GC T-486/08 of 9.12.2009 SUPERSKIN, ref. 27; GC T-162/08 of 11.11.2009 GREEN by missako/MI SA KO, ref. 27.

    ↩

  10. GC T-286/03 of 13 April 2005 WILKINSON SWORD XTREME III/RIGHT GUARD XTREME SPORT, para. 20 f.; GC T-418/03 of 27 September 2007 LABORATOIRE DE LA MER/LA MER, para. 107; GC T-93/06 of 19 June 2008 SPA/MINERAL SPA, para. 28; GC T-160/07 of 8 July 2008 COLOR EDITION, para. 28. 2008 COLOR EDITION, para. 45, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-408/08 P of 25 February 2010 Lancôme; GC T-184/07 of 26 November 2008 ANEW ALTERNATIVE, para. 23; GC T-471/07 of 15 September 2009 TAME IT, para. 20; GC T-486/08 of 9 December 2009 SUPERSKIN, para. 27.

    ↩

  11. GC T-136/07 of 9 December 2008 VISIBLE WHITE, para. 35; GC T-150/08 of 11 November 2009 Clina/CLINAIR, para. 33, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-22/10 P of 27 October 2010 REWE Central; GC T-486/08 of 9 December 2009 SUPERSKIN, para. 27.

    ↩

  12. GC T-342/05 of 23 May 2007 Dor/COR, ref. 35; GC T-57/06 of 7 November 2007 TOFIX/Top iX, ref. 46 f.; GC T-150/08 of 11 November 2009 Clina/CLINAIR, ref. 33, confirmed by CJEU C-22/10 P of 27 October 2010 REWE Central.

    ↩

  13. GC T-476/08 of 15 December 2009 BEST BUY, ref. 22, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-92/10 P of 13 January 2011 Media-Saturn-Holding.

    ↩

  14. GC T-78/08 of 11 June 2009 Pinzette, ref. 25; GC T-391/07 of 16 September 2009 Griff, ref. 50.

    ↩

  15. GC T-460/05 of 10 October 2007 Shape of a loudspeaker, ref. 29; GC T-476/08 of 15 December 2009 BEST BUY, ref. 22, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-92/10 P of 13 January 2011 Media-Saturn-Holding.

    ↩

  16. GC T-311/01 of 22 October 2003 ASTERIX/Starix, para. 44; GC T-352/02 of 25 May 2005 W WORK PRO/PC WORKS, para. 25; GC T-461/04 of 20 September 2007 PURE DIGITAL, para. 23, confirmed in the result by CJEU C-542/07 P of 11 June 2009 Imagination Technologies; CJEU C-542/07 P of 11 June 2009 Imagination Technologies, para. 23, confirmed in the result by CJEU C-542/07 P of 11 June 2009. 2009 Imagination Technologies; GC T-105/06 of 17 October 2007 WinDVD Creator, para. 28 ff.; GC T-459/05 of 8 November 2007 manufacturing score card, para. 22, confirmed in the result by CJEU C-17/08 P of 6 February 2009 MPDV Mikrolab; GC T-38/04 of 15 November 2007 SUN/SUNPLUS, paras. 31 and 33 [also on computer components], confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-21/08 P of 26 March 2009 Sunplus Technology, para. 37; GC T-242/07 of 12 November 2008 QWEB/Q2WEB, para. 22; CJEU T-414/07 of 2 July 2009 Hand. 2 July 2009 Hand, holding a card, ref. 33; GC T-309/08 of 21 January 2010 G Stor/G-STAR and G-STAR RAW DENIM, ref. 25; in principle general public, exceptionally for specialised software specialised circles: GC T-79/07 of 26 June 2008 POLAR/POLARIS, para. 27 ff.; GC T-328/05 of 1 July 2008 QUARTZ/QUARTZ, para. 17 ff., confirmed in result by GC C-416/08 P of 10 July 2009 Apple Computer; specialised circles (incorrect): GC T-181/07 of 2 April 2008 STEADYCONTROL, ref. 40; also specialised circles: GC T-205/06 of 22 May 2008 Presto/Presto! Bizcard Reader, ref. 35.

    ↩

  17. GC T-446/07 of 15 September 2009 Centrixx/sensixx, ref. 27 f., confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-448/09 P of 30 June 2010 Royal Appliance International v OHIM.

    ↩

  18. GC T-339/07 of 28 October 2009 Panorama, ref. 31 ff.

    ↩

  19. GC T-169/04 of 14 December 2005 CARPO/CARPOVIRUSINE, ref. 45 ff.

    ↩

  20. GC T-9/05 of 15 January 2008 Amply/AMPLITUDE, ref. 34; GC T-309/08 of 21 January 2010 G Stor/G-STAR and G-STAR RAW DENIM, ref. 25.

    ↩

  21. GC T-139/08 of 29 September 2009 Smiley-Halbmund, ref. 19 f.; GC T-75/08 of 30 September 2009 ! (exclamation mark), ref. 25 f.; GC T-191/08 of 30 September 2009 ! (exclamation mark in a rectangle), ref. 25 f.; GC T-476/08 of 15 December 2009 BEST BUY, ref. 22, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-92/10 P of 13 January 2011 Media-Saturn-Holding.

    ↩

  22. GC T-152/07 of 14 September 2009 Geometric fields on the dial of a watch, ref. 87.

    ↩

  23. GC T-476/08 of 15 December 2009 BEST BUY, ref. 22, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-92/10 P of 13 January 2011 Media-Saturn-Holding.

    ↩

  24. GC T-476/08 of 15 December 2009 BEST BUY , ref. 22, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-92/10 P of 13 January 2011 Media-Saturn-Holding; GC T-80/07 of 16 September 2009 BUILT TO RESIST, ref. 24 ff.; GC T-472/07 of 3 February 2010 ENERCON/TRANSFORMERS ENERGON, ref. 26, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-204/10 P of 23 November 2010 ENERCON.

    ↩

  25. GC T-158/06 of 23 October 2008 FLEX, ref. 45; for games average consumer: GC T-290/07 of 10 December 2008 METRO/METRONIA, ref. 37.

    ↩

  26. GC T-133/06 of 23 October 2008 PAST PERFECT, ref. 27.

    ↩

  27. GC T-134/06 of 13 December 2007 LES PAGES JAUNES/PAGESJAUNES.COM, para. 45 f.; GC T-425/07 and T-426/07 of 19 November 2009 100 and 300, para. 24, confirmed in the result by CJEU C-56/10 P of 22 June 2011 Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v OHIM; GC T-298/06 of 19 December 2009 100, para. 24, confirmed in the result by CJEU C-56/10 P of 22 June 2011 Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v OHIM; GC T-298/06 of 22 June 2011 Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v OHIM. 19.12.2009 1000, ref. 24, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-51/10 P of 10.3.2011 Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v OHIM; GC T-64/07 to T-66/07 of 19.11.2009 350, 250 and 150, ref. 25; GC T-200/07 to T-202/07 of 19.11.2009 222, 333 and 555, ref. 26.

    ↩

  28. GC T-112/06 of 16 January 2008 IKEA/idea, para. 34 ff.; GC T-339/07 of 28 October 2009 Panorama, para. 31 ff.; GC T-476/08 of 15 December 2009 BEST BUY, para. 22, confirmed in conclusion by GC C-92/10 P of 13 January 2011 Media-Saturn-Holding.

    ↩

  29. GC T-857/16 of 26 October 2017 Weißbierglas, ref. 27.

    ↩

  30. GC T-230/06 of 15 October 2008 PORT LOUIS, ref. 37; GC T-304/07 of 5 November 2008 Stylised bow, ref. 30; GC T-80/07 of 16 September 2009 BUILT TO RESIST, ref. 24 ff.; GC T-139/08 of 29 September 2009 Smiley-House, ref. 29.9.2009 Smiley-Halbmund, ref. 19 f.; GC T-472/07 of 3.2.2010 ENERCON/TRANSFORMERS ENERGON, ref. 26, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-204/10 P of 23.11.2010 ENERCON.

    ↩

  31. GC T-246/06 of 6 May 2008 Revert/REVERIE, para. 31; GC T-230/06 of 15 October 2008 PORT LOUIS, para. 37; GC T-472/07 of 3 February 2010 ENERCON/TRANSFORMERS ENERGON, para. 26, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-204/10 P of 23 November 2010 ENERCON.

    ↩

  32. GC T-423/04 of 5 October 2005 BoA RODS/BKR, ref. 54; GC T-88/05 of 8 February 2007 MARS/NARS, ref. 53; GC T-39/04 of 14 February 2008 D'ORSAY/O orsay, ref. 36 f.; GC T-378/04 of 14 February 2008 D'ORSAY/O orsay, ref. 36. 14.2.2008 D'ORSAY/Orsay, ref. 32 f.; GC T-96/06 of 10.9.2008 EXE/exe, ref. 22; GC T-116/06 of 24.9.2008 THE O STORE/O STORE, ref. 40; GC T-179/07 of 24. 9.2008 ANVIL/Aprile, ref. 55; GC T-230/06 of 15.10.2008 PORT LOUIS, ref. 37; GC T-547/08 of 15.6.2010 Orange colouring of the toe area of a sock, ref. 19, confirmed by CJEU C-429/10 P of 16.5.2011 X Technology Swiss; on children's clothing GC T-346/04 of 24.11.2005 Arthur/ARTHUR ET FELICIE, ref. 29; on sportswear and sports shoes BGH I ZB 30/06 of 15 January 2009 STREETBALL, ref. 12; in this respect also CJEU C-320/07 P of 12 March 2009 Antartica, ref. 50; CJEU T-80/07 of 16 September 2009 BUILT. 16.9.2009 BUILT TO RESIST, ref. 24 ff.; GC T-103/07 of 23.9.2009 TRACK & FIELD USA/TRACK & FIELD, ref. 33; GC T-139/08 of 29.9.2009 Smiley-Halbmund, ref. 19 f.; GC on underwear T-220/07 P of 29.9.2009 Smiley-Halbmund, ref. 19. GC on underwear T-273/08 of 28 October 2009 First-On-Skin/FIRST, ref. 25 f.; GC T-162/08 of 11 November 2009 GREEN by missako/MI SA KO, ref. 27; GC T-309/08 of 21 January 2010 G Stor/G-STAR and 2010 G Stor/G-STAR and G-STAR RAW DENIM, ref. 25; GC T-472/07 of 3 February 2010 ENERCON/TRANSFORMERS ENERGON, ref. 26, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-204/10 P of 23 November 2010 ENERCON.

    ↩

  33. GC T-169/03 of 1 March 2005 MISS ROSSI/SISSI ROSSI, ref. 49.

    ↩

  34. GC T-425/07 and T-426/07 of 19 November 2009 100 and 300, ref. 24, confirmed in the result by GC C-56/10 P of 22 June 2011 Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v OHIM; GC T-472/07 of 3 February 2010 ENERCON/TRANSFORMERS ENERGON, ref. 26, confirmed in the result by GC C-204/10 P of 23 November 2010 ENERCON.

    ↩

  35. GC T-99/01 of 15 January 2003 Mystery/Mixery, ref. 37 and 41; GC T-129/04 of 15 March 2006 Shape of a plastic bottle, ref. 46; GC T-13/05 of 25 October 2006 RODA/ODA, ref. 46 [Wein]; GC T-149/06 of 20 November 2007 CASTELL, ref. 20.11.2007 CASTELLUCA/CASTELLANI, ref. 48 [wine]; GC T-28/06 of 6.11.2007 VOM URSPRUNG HER VOLLKOMMEN, ref. 22 [beer]; GC T-101/06 of 14.11.2007 RODA/Castell del Remei ODA, ref. 52; GC T-111/06 of 21 November 2007 VITAFIT/VITAL & FIT, para. 30; GC T-332/04 of 12 March 2008 EL COTO/Coto D'Arcis, para. 29; GC T-175/06 of 18 June 2008 MEZZO/MEZZOPANE, para. 21; EuG T-93/06 v. 19.6.2008 SPA/MINERAL SPA, Tz. 28; EuG T-161/07 v. 4.11.2008 COYOTE UGLY/COYOTE UGLY, Tz. 25 [auch zum Betrieb von Bars und Diskotheken]; EuG T-7/04 v. 12.11. 2008 LIMONCHELO/Limoncello II, ref. 32; GC T-210/05 of 12.11.2008 LIMONCHELO/Limoncello di Capri, ref. 26; GC T-285/06 of 18.12.2008 TORRES/TORRE DE FRÍAS, ref. 42 [wine]; GC T-286/06 of 18.12.2008 TORRES/TORRE DE FRÍAS, ref. 42 [wine]. 18.12.2008 TORRES/TORRE DE GAZATE, ref. 42 [wine]; GC T-287/06 of 18.12.2008 TORRES/Torre Albéniz, ref. 45 [wine]; GC T-8/07 of 18.12.2008 TORRES 10/TG Torre Galatea, ref. 43 [wine]; GC T-16/07 of 18.12.2008 TORRES/TORRE DE BENÍTEZ, ref. 46 [wine]; GC T-23/07 of 29.4.2009 a, ref. 38 [alcoholic beverages other than beers, wines, sparkling wines and vinous beverages], confirmed in conclusion by GC C-265/09 P of 9 September 2010 OHIM/BORCO-Marken-Import; GC T-291/07 of 23 September 2009 ALFONSO/PRÍNCIPE DE ALFONCO, ref. 27 ff. [Wines and alcoholic beverages with the exception of beer]; GC T-234/06 of 19 November 2009 CANNABIS, ref. 27, confirmed in conclusion by GC C-5/10 P of 16 May 2011 Giampietro Torresan [Beer, wine, spirits, liqueurs, sparkling wine, champagne]; GC T-472/07 of 3 February 2010 ENERCON, ref. 3 February 2010 ENERCON/TRANSFORMERS ENERGON, ref. 26, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-204/10 P of 23 November 2010 ENERCON [beer, mineral and table water, fruit and vegetable juices].

    ↩

  36. GC T-230/07 of 8 July 2009 ESTER-E/ESTEVE, ref. 35 [on food supplements and medicinal products]; GC T-539/15 of 28 September 2016 LLR-G5, ref. 25 [medicinal products]; also healthcare professionals: GC T-240/08 of 8 July 2009 oli/OLAY, ref. 27 f.; GC T-221/06 of 16 September 2009 Bebimil/BLEMIL, ref. 36 and 41.

    ↩

  37. GC T-110/01 of 12.12.2002 SAINT-HUBERT 41/HUBERT, ref. 40; GC T-85/02 of 4.11.2003 EL CASTILLO/CASTILLO, ref. 31; GC T-286/02 of 25.11.2003 MOU/KIAP MOU, ref. 28; GC T-74/04 of 22.2.2006 QUICKY/QUICK, ref. 45, annulled on other grounds by CJEU C-193/06 P of 20.9.2007 Nestlé v OHIM; GC T-35/04 of 15.3.2006 FERRERO/FERRÓ, ref. 42; GC T-129/04 of 15.3.2006 Shape of a plastic bottle, ref. 46; GC T-242/06 of 13.12.2007 El Charcutero/el charcutero artesano, ref. 38; GC T-304/06 of 9.7.2008 Mozart, ref. 93; GC T-147/06 of 26.11.2008 FRESHHH, ref. 16; GC T-265/06 of 12.2.2009 PIAZZA/PIAZZA del SOLE, ref. 34; also GC T-341/06 of 12.3.2008 GARUM, ref. 36 f., where, however, reference is also made to restaurateurs; GC T-449/07 of 5.5.2009 Wurstform, ref. 25; GC T-28/08 of 8.7.2009 Schokoriegel, ref. 30.

    ↩

  38. GC T-150/08 of 11 November 2009 Clina/CLINAIR, ref. 33, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-22/10 P of 27 October 2010 REWE Central: GC T-240/08 of 8 July 2009 oli/OLAY, ref. 27 f.; GC T-221/06 of 16 September 2009 Bebimil/BLEMIL, ref. 36 and 41.

    ↩

  39. GC C-304/06 P of 8 May 2008 Eurohypo, para. 68; previously already GC T-439/04 of 3 May 2006 EUROHYPO, para. 47 f.; GC T-10/07 of 17 September 2008 FVD/FVB, para. 36; GC T-414/07 of 2 July 2009 Hand, holding a card, para. 33.

    ↩

  40. GC T-10/07 of 17 September 2008 FVD/FVB, ref. 36; GC T-289/08 of 11 February 2010 Deutsche BKK, ref. 38.

    ↩

  41. GC T-10/07 of 17 September 2008 FVD/FVB, ref. 36.

    ↩

  42. GC T-311/01 of 22 October 2003 ASTERIX/Starix, ref. 44; even for telecommunications services by means of submarine cable GC T-172/04 of 27 September 2006 EMERGEA/emergia, ref. 65 et seq. 11 May 2005 CM/capital markets CM, para. 26; GC T-414/07 of 2 July 2009 Hand, holding a card, para. 33; GC T-396/07 of 23 September 2009 UNIQUE, para. 20; GC T-399/08 of 19 November 2009 CLEARWIFI, para. 26 ff.

    ↩

  43. GC T-36/07 of 25 June 2008 CICAR/ZIPCAR, ref. 32 ff., confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-394/08 P of 3 June 2009 Zipcar.

    ↩

  44. GC T-34/07 of 21 January 2010 DSBW/DSB, ref. 29, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-156/10 P of 15 December 2010 Goncharov.

    ↩

  45. GC T-36/07 of 25 June 2008 CICAR/ZIPCAR, para. 32 ff., confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-394/08 P of 3 June 2009 Zipcar; GC T-34/07 of 21 January 2010 DSBW/DSB, para. 29, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-156/10 P of 15 December 2010 Goncharov.

    ↩

  46. GC T-35/04 of 15 March 2006 FERRERO/FERRÓ, ref. 42; GC T-34/07 of 21 January 2010 DSBW/DSB, ref. 29, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-156/10 P of 15 December 2010 Goncharov.

    ↩

  47. GC T-473/08 of 17 November 2009 THINKING AHEAD, ref. 29; GC T-34/07 of 21 January 2010 DSBW/DSB, ref. 29, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-156/10 P of 15 December 2010 Goncharov; GC T-289/08 of 11 February 2010 Deutsche BKK, ref. 38.

    ↩

  48. GC T-34/07 of 21 January 2010 DSBW/DSB, ref. 29, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-156/10 P of 15 December 2010 Goncharov.

    ↩

  49. GC T-463/12 of 6 November 2014 MB&P/MB, ref. 66, confirmed in conclusion by GC C-17/15 P of 26 October 2015 Popp and Zech.

    ↩

  50. GC T-289/08 of 11 February 2010 Deutsche BKK, ref. 38.

    ↩

  51. GC T-164/06 of 12 September 2007 BASICS, ref. 22; GC T-224/07 of 10 October 2008 LIGHT & SPACE, ref. 23.

    ↩

  52. GC T-146/08 of 13 October 2009 REDROCK/Rock, ref. 41.

    ↩

  53. GC T-132/08 of 11 June 2009 MaxiBridge, ref. 32.

    ↩

  54. GC T-297/07 of 15 October 2008 Intelligent Voltage Guard, ref. 30.

    ↩

  55. GC T-307/07 of 21 January 2009 AIRSHOWER, 24.

    ↩

  56. GC T-324/01 and T-110/02 of 30 April 2003 Shape of a cigar and a gold ingot, ref. 31; GC T-15/05 of 31 May 2006 Shape of a sausage, ref. 24 ff.

    ↩

  57. GC T-363/06 of 9 September 2008 SEAT/MAGIC SEAT, ref. 21.

    ↩

  58. BGH I ZB 11/04 of 19 January 2006 LOTTO, ref. 22.

    ↩

  59. GC T-359/02 of 4 May 2005 STAR TV, ref. 28 f.

    ↩

  60. GC T-405/05 of 15 October 2008 MANPOWER, ref. 57, confirmed by CJEU C-553/08 P of 2 December 2009 Powerserv Personalservice, ref. 39 ff.

    ↩

  61. If the list of goods is not limited to prescription-only medicinal products, the general public is also uniformly taken into account: GC T-260/03 of 14 May 2005 CELLTECH, ref. 30; GC T-202/04 of 5 April 2006 ECHINACIN/ECHINAID, ref. 23; GC T-256/04 of 13 February 2007 RESPICORT/RESPICUR, ref. 44; BGH GRUR 1999, 735, 736 MONOFLAM/POLYFLAM; BGH GRUR 2002, 342, 344 ASTRA/ESTRA-PUREN; in the case of non-prescription products without a medical indication only the general public: GC T-484/08 of 9 December 2009 Kids Vits/VITS4KIDS, ref. 25 ff, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-84/10 P of 22 October 2010 Longevity Health Products; in the case of medicinal products that are not supplied to end consumers at all, however, it is only the specialised public that matters: CJEU C-412/05 P of 26 April 2007 Alcon (II), ref. 66, with reference to CJEU C-192/03 P of 5 October 2004 BSS.

    ↩

  62. GC C-412/05 P of 26 April 2007 Alcon (II), ref. 52 ff.; also GC T-130/03 of 22 September 2005 TRIVASTAN/TRAVATAN, ref. 49; GC T-154/03 of 17 November 2005 ARTEX/ALREX, ref. 45 f., Appeal to the CJEU (ref. C-95/06 P) withdrawn; GC T-483/04 of 17 October 2006 CALSYN/GALZIN, para. 66; GC T-146/06 of 13 February 2008 URION/ATURION, para. 22 ff.; GC T-327/06 of 18 February 2008 Pneumo/PNEUMO UPDATE, para. 31; GC T-166/06 of 29.9.2008 POWDERMED, ref. 22; GC T-95/07 of 21.10.2008 PREZAL/PRAZOL, ref. 27 et seq.; GC T-6/07 of 19.11.2008 TANNOLACT/Nanolat, ref. 39 et seq.; GC T-477/08 of 4.3.2010 AVANZALENE/AVANZ, ref. 22.

    ↩

  63. BGH GRUR 1997, 629, 632 Sermion II; BGH GRUR 1998, 815, 817 Nitrangin; BGH GRUR 1999, 587, 589 Cefallone, with further references. N.; BGH GRUR 2000, 603, 604 f. Ketof/ETOP; differentiating in an exhaustion case BGH I ZR 208/05 of 5 June 2008 KLACID PRO, ref. 26; see later possibly deviating also BGH I ZB 52/09 of 1 June 2011 Maalox/Melox-GRY, ref. 9.

    ↩

  64. BGH GRUR 1998, 815, 817 Nitrangin, with further proof.

    ↩

  65. GC T-353/04 of 13 February 2007 EURON/CURON, ref. 58 ff.; GC T-425/03 of 18 October 2007 AMS/AMS Advanced Medical Services, ref. 50 f.; GC T-302/06 of 9 July 2008 E, ref. 36 [also on dressings]; professionals: GC T-821/17 of 12 December 2018 Vitromed/VITROMED Germany, ref. 30 f., confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-124/19 P of 11 September 2019 Vitromed.

    ↩

  66. BGH I ZR 30/16 of 2 March 2017 Medicon-Apotheke/MediCo Apotheke, ref. 22.

    ↩

  67. GC T-211/03 of 20 April 2005 NABER/Faber, ref. 23 ff.; GC T-389/03 of 17 April 2008 Pelikan, ref. 56 ff.; GC T-58/07 of 9 July 2008 Substance for Success, ref. 23; GC T-201/06 of 10 September 2008 Farbfilter, ref. 10.9.2008 Farbfilter, ref. 25 [on colour screens and filters]; GC T-315/06 of 19.11.2008 CROS/TAI CROS, ref. 24 ff.; GC T-113/09 of 9.2.2010 SupplementPack, ref. 31.

    ↩

  68. GC T-113/09 of 9 February 2010 SupplementPack, ref. 31.

    ↩

  69. GC T-296/07 of 21 January 2009 PharmaCheck, ref. 31.

    ↩

  70. GC T-462/05 of 10 December 2008 IFS, ref. 31.

    ↩

  71. GC T-71/06 of 15 November 2007 Shape of the nacelle cladding of a wind energy converter, ref. 25, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-20/08 P of 9 December 2008 Enercon; GC T-329/06 of 21 May 2008 E, ref. 25.

    ↩

  72. GC T-224/01 of 9 April 2003 TUFFTRIDE/NU-TRIDE, ref. 37; also GC T-367/02 to T-369/02 of 12 January 2005 SnTEM, SnPUR, SnMIX, ref. 20; GC T-189/05 of 14 February 2008 GALVALLIA/GALVALLOY, ref. 51 ff.

    ↩

  73. GC T-71/08 of 8 July 2009 PROSIMA PROSIMA COMERCIAL S. A./PROMINA, ref. 21 f.

    ↩

  74. GC T-317/01 of 30 June 2004 EURODATA TV/M+M EUROdATA, ref. 51 ff. [with restrictions]; GC T-459/05 of 8 November 2007 manufacturing score card, para. 22 f., confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-17/08 P of 6 February 2009 MPDV Mikrolab; T-413/07 of 11 February 2009 Life Sciences Partners/LifeScience, para. 29; a. A. on advertising [also general public]: GC T-100/06 of 26 November 2008 ARTOZ/ATOZ, ref. 58, confirmed in result by CJEU C-559/08 P of 16 September 2010 Rajani.

    ↩

  75. GC T-459/05 of 8 November 2007 manufacturing score card, ref. 22 f., confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-17/08 P of 6 February 2009 MPDV Mikrolab.

    ↩

  76. GC T-482/08 of 10 June 2010 ATLAS TRANSPORT, ref. 33.

    ↩

  77. GC T-113/09 of 9 February 2010 SupplementPack, ref. 31.

    ↩

  78. GC T-336/03 of 27 October 2005 OBELIX/MOBILIX, para. 57, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-16/06 P of 18 December 2008 René, para. 62 ff.; GC T-113/09 of 9 February 2010 SupplementPack, para. 31.

    ↩

  79. CJEU T-106/07 of 10 September 2008 DUOVISK/BioVisk, ref. 26, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-481/08 P of 24 September 2009 Alcon; CJEU T-325/06 of 10 September 2008 CAPIOX/CAPIO, ref. 75.

    ↩

  80. GC T-88/06 of 24 January 2008 SAFETY 1ST, ref. 32, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-131/08 P of 30 January 2009 Dorel Juvenile.

    ↩

  81. See Section 1.2.

    ↩

  82. GC C-371/02 of 29 April 2004 Björnekulla Fruktindustrier, para. 24 ff.; also GC T-324/01 and T-110/02 of 30 April 2003 Shape of a cigar and a gold ingot, para. 31; GC T-31/03 of 11 May 2005 Sadia/GRUPO SADA, para. 47; GC T-15/05 of 31 May 2006 Shape of a sausage, para. 24 ff.

    ↩

  83. CJEU C-104/01 of 6 May 2003 Libertel, ref. 46; CJEU C-456/01 P and C-457/01 P of 29 April 2004 Three-dimensional tablet shape I, ref. 35; CJEU C-468/01 P to C-472/01 P of 29 April 2004 Three-dimensional tablet shape I, ref. 35; CJEU C-468/01 P to C-472/01 P of 29 April 2004 Three-dimensional tablet shape I, ref. 35. 4.2004 Dreidimensionale Tablettenform II, ref. 33; CJEU C-473/01 P and C-474/01 P of 29.4.2004 Dreidimensionale Tablettenform III, ref. 33; CJEU C-329/02 P of 16.9.2004 SAT.2, para. 24; CJEU C-107/03 P of 23 September 2004 Shape of a soap, paras. 30 and 39; CJEU C-136/02 P of 7 October 2004 Mag Instrument, para. 19; CJEU C-24/05 P of 22 June 2006 Storck I, ref. 2006 Storck I, ref. 23; CJEU C-25/05 P of 22 June 2006 Storck II, ref. 25; CJEU C-412/05 P of 26 April 2007 Alcon (II), ref. 62; CJEU C-304/06 P of 8 May 2008 Eurohypo, ref. 68; also GC T-36/01 of 9.10.2002 Glass Pattern I, ref. 25; GC T-160/02 to T-162/02 of 11.5.2005 Naipes Heraclio Fournier, ref. 45, confirmed in the result by CJEU C-311/05 P of 4.10.2007 Naipes Heraclio Fournier v OHIM; GC T-430/07 of 29.4.2009 MONTEBELLO RHUM AGRICOLE/MONTEBELLO, ref. 20.

    ↩

  84. BGH GRUR 1998, 942, 943 ALKA-SELTZER; BGH GRUR 2000, 506, 509 ATTACHÉ/TISSERAND.

    ↩

  85. CJEU C-210/96 of 16 July 1998 Gut Springenheide and Tusky, ref. 31 ff.; see also CJEU C-303/97 of 28 January 1999 Sektkellerei Kessler, ref. 36 and 38; CJEU C-220/98 of 13 January 2000 Lifting-Creme, ref. 27; CJEU C-465/98 of 4 April 2000 Adolf Darbo AG, ref. 20 (‘naturrein’).

    ↩

  86. CJEU C-342/97 of 22 June 1999 Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer, ref. 26; CJEU C-291/00 of 20 March 2003 LTJ Diffusion/Sadas Vertbaudet, ref. 52; CJEU C-104/01 of 6 May 2003 Libertel, ref. 64; CJEU C-107/03 P of 23 September 2004 Form of a soap. 23.9.2004 Shape of a soap, ref. 44; also BGH GRUR 2000, 506, 509 ATTACHÉ/TISSERAND; GC T-104/01 of 23.10.2002 Miss Fifties/Fifties, ref. 28; GC T-169/02 of 15.2.2005 Modelo/negra modelo, ref. 45.

    ↩

  87. GC C-342/97 of 22 June 1999 Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer, para. 26; GC C-361/04 P of 12 January 2006 Picasso, para. 38; see for example GC T-185/02 of 22 June 2004 PICASSO/PICARO, para. 59 f.; GC T-117/02 of 6 July 2004 CHUFI/CHUFAFIT, para. 42; BGHZ 139, 340, 345 Lions.

    ↩

  88. CJEU C-171/06 P of 15 March 2007 T. I. M. E. ART, ref. 59; GC C-480/15 P of 14 April 2016 KS Sports IPCo, ref. 57; GC T-355/00 of 20 March 2002 TELE AID, ref. 42; GC T-324/01 and T-110/02 of 30 April 2003. 2003 Shape of a cigar and a gold ingot, ref. 36; GC T-13/05 of 25 October 2006 RODA/ODA, ref. 46; GC T-460/05 of 10 October 2007 Shape of a loudspeaker, ref. 31; GC T-328/05 of 1 July 2008 QUARTZ, ref. 1 July 2008 QUARTZ/QUARTZ, para. 63 [on software for a special operating system], confirmed in the result by GC C-416/08 P of 10 July 2009 Apple Computer; also GC T-101/06 of 14 November 2007 RODA/Castell del Remei ODA, para. 52; similarly BGH I ZB 100/05 of 28 September 2006 COHIBA, para. 24; BGH I ZB 24/05 of 21 February 2008 VISAGE, para. 32.

    ↩

  89. On this, see below Section 5.

    ↩

  90. CJEU C-480/15 P of 14 April 2016 KS Sports IPCo, ref. 57.

    ↩

  91. BGHZ 139, 340, 345 Lions; similarly GC T-129/01 of 3 July 2003 BUD/BUDMEN, ref. 41; GC T-292/01 of 14 October 2003 PASH/BASS, ref. 43; GC T-117/03 to T-119/03 and T-171/03 of 6 October 2004 NL, ref. 25 and 43; on the other hand on socks [rather low] GC T-547/08 of 15 June 2010. 2010 Orange colouring of the toe area of a sock, ref. 19, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-429/10 P of 16.5.2011 X Technology Swiss; also GC T-385/03 of 7.7.2005 MILES/Biker Miles, ref. 28 f.; GC T-307/08 of 20.10.2009 4 OUT Living/Living & Co, ref. 18 ff.; GC T-427/07 of 19.3.2010 Mirtillino/MIRTO, ref. 38 ff.

    ↩

  92. GC T-133/06 of 23 October 2008 PAST PERFECT, ref. 28.

    ↩

  93. GC T-221/06 of 16 September 2009 Bebimil/BLEMIL, ref. 40.

    ↩

  94. GC T-446/07 of 15 September 2009 Centrixx/sensixx, ref. 28 f., confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-448/09 P of 30 June 2010 Royal Appliance International v OHIM.

    ↩

  95. GC T-34/07 of 21 January 2010 DSBW/DSB, ref. 36, confirmed in the result by CJEU C-156/10 P of 15 December 2010 Goncharov.

    ↩

  96. GC T-427/07 of 19 March 2010 Mirtillino/MIRTO, ref. 38 ff.

    ↩

  97. GC T-692/14 of 25 February 2016 Puma, ref. 25.

    ↩

  98. GC T-283/04 of 17 January 2007 Reliefmotiv, ref. 41.

    ↩

  99. CJEU T-421/10 of 5 October 2011 ROSALIA/ROSALIA DE CASTRO, ref. 27, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-649/11 P of 3 October 2012 Cooperativa Vitivinícola Arousana S.

    ↩

  100. GC T-430/07 of 29 April 2009 MONTEBELLO RHUM AGRICOLE/MONTEBELLO, ref. 35.

    ↩

  101. GC T-75/08 of 30 September 2009 ! (exclamation mark), ref. 25 f.; GC T-191/08 of 30 September 2009 ! (exclamation mark in a rectangle), ref. 25 f.

    ↩

  102. GC T-309/08 of 21 January 2010 G Stor/G-STAR and G-STAR RAW DENIM, ref. 25.

    ↩

  103. GC T-185/02 of 22 June 2004 PICASSO/PICARO, para. 59, confirmed by GC C-361/04 P of 12 January 2006 Picasso, paras. 20, 23 and 39; GC T-158/05 of 16 May 2007 TREK/ALLTREK, paras. 50 and 82 [also on bicycles]; GC T-363/06 of 9 September 2008 SEAT/MAGIC SEAT, paras. 60 f. [on vehicle seats]; similarly. [on vehicle seats]; similarly (also on spare parts) GC T-317/03 of 26 January 2006 DERBIVARIANT/DERBI, ref. 40.

    ↩

  104. GC T-237/10 of 14 December 2011 lock mechanism, ref. 22, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-97/12 P of 15 May 2014 Louis Vuitton Malletier.

    ↩

  105. GC T-152/07 of 14 September 2009 Geometric fields on the dial of a watch, ref. 87.

    ↩

  106. GC T-112/06 of 16 January 2008 IKEA/idea, ref. 34 ff.; GC T-339/07 of 28 October 2009 Panorama, ref. 33.

    ↩

  107. GC T-297/07 of 15 October 2008 Intelligent Voltage Guard, ref. 31; GC T-212/07 of 2 December 2008 BECKER/Barbara Becker, ref. 26; GC T-357/07 of 16 December 2008 FOCUS MILENIUM/FOCUS Radio, ref. 28.

    ↩

  108. GC T-460/05 of 10 October 2007 Form of a loudspeaker, ref. 33 ff.; more cautious, however, GC T-358/04 of 12 September 2007 Form of a microphone basket, ref. 34 ff. and 57.

    ↩

  109. GC T-458/08 of 8 September 2010 Guitar head, ref. 49 ff., confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-546/10 P of 13 September 2011 Wilfer.

    ↩

  110. GC T-137/08 of 28 October 2009 Green, Yellow, ref. 43 f., appeal to CJEU C-553/09 P withdrawn due to settlement of the parties.

    ↩

  111. GC T-346/07 of 13 November 2008 EASYCOVER, ref. 46; GC T-146/08 of 13 October 2009 REDROCK/Rock, ref. 47.

    ↩

  112. GC T-483/04 of 17 October 2006 CALSYN/GALZIN, para. 79; GC T-256/04 of 13 February 2007 RESPICORT/RESPICUR, para. 46; GC T-146/06 of 13 February 2008 URION/ATURION, para. 27; GC T-95/07 of 21 October 2008 PREZAL/PRAZOL, para. 30.

    ↩

  113. GC T-493/07, T-26/08 and T-27/08 of 23 September 2009 FAMOXIN/LANOXIN, para. 58, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-461/09 P of 9 July 2010 The Welcome Foundation, para. 19 ff.; CJEU T-539/15 of 28 September 2016 LLR-G5, para. 26.

    ↩

  114. GC T-373/06 of 8 September 2008 EPIGRAN/Epican Forte, ref. 33; GC T-374/06 of 8 September 2008 EPIGRAN/Epican, ref. 33, both confirmed by GC C-488/08 P and C-489/08 P of 4 December 2009 Rath; CJEU C-488/08 P and C-489/08 P of 4 December 2009 Rath. 4.12.2009 Rath; GC T-230/07 of 8.7.2009 ESTER-E/ESTEVE, ref. 36; GC T-63/13 of 7.11.2013 AYUS/AYUR, ref. 19 ff, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-22/14 P of 2 July 2014 Three-N-Products; more cautious CJEU T-539/15 of 28 September 2016 LLR-G5, ref. 26.

    ↩

  115. GC T-330/06 of 10 June 2008 BLUE SOFT, ref. 42.

    ↩

  116. GC T-309/08 of 21 January 2010 G Stor/G-STAR and G-STAR RAW DENIM, ref. 25.

    ↩

  117. GC T-305/06 to T-307/06 of 15 October 2008 FERROMAXX, INOMAXX and ALUMAXX/Ferromix, Inomix and Alumix, ref. 34, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-579/08 P of 15 January 2010 Messer Group.

    ↩

  118. GC T-441/05 of 13 June 2007 I, ref. 63 f.; GC T-10/07 of 17 September 2008 FVD/FVB, ref. 35.

    ↩

  119. GC T-100/06 of 26 November 2008 ARTOZ/ATOZ, ref. 58, confirmed in conclusion by CJEU C-559/08 P of 16 September 2010 Rajani.

    ↩

  120. GC T-390/03 of 11.5.2005 CM/capital markets CM, ref. 26; GC T-10/07 of 17.9.2008 FVD/FVB, ref. 35; but different for everyday financial services GC T-320/03 of 15.9.2005 LIVE RICHLY, ref. 71 ff.

    ↩

  121. GC T-335/07 of 16 December 2008 Patentconsult, ref. 20, confirmed by GC C-80/09 P of 5 February 2010 Mergel and others; GC T-463/12 of 6 November 2014 MB&P/MB, ref. 66, confirmed in the result by GC C-17/15 P of 26 October 2015 Popp and Zech.

    ↩

  122. BGH I ZR 195/17 of 7 March 2019 SAM, ref. 34 and 36.

    ↩

  123. BGH I ZB 64/13 of 22 May 2014 ECR Award.

    ↩

  124. BGH I ZB 64/13 of 22 May 2014 ECR Award, ref. 13 f.

    ↩

  125. CJEU C-456/01 P and C-457/01 P of 29 April 2004 Three-dimensional tablet shape I, ref. 56; CJEU C-468/01 P to C-472/01 P of 29 April 2004 Three-dimensional tablet shape II, ref. 53; CJEU C-473/01 P and C-474/01 P of 29 April 2004 Three-dimensional tablet shape III, ref. 53.

    ↩

  126. CJEU C-37/03 P of 15 September 2005 BioID, ref. 42.

    ↩

  127. For example Gloy, FS-Erdmann, 811 ff.; Ullmann, GRUR 2003, 817, 818 f.

    ↩

  128. GC C-210/96 of 16 July 1998 Gut Springenheide and Tusky, ref. 31, 35 and 37; on the content of a survey GC T-147/03 of 12 January 2006 Quantième/Quantum, ref. 82.

    ↩

  129. BGH GRUR 2002, 550, 552 Elternbriefe, m. w. w. N. w. also on the deviating earlier case law; also BGH I ZR 110/03 of 29 June 2006 Ichthyol II, ref. 27; BGH I ZR 100/11 of 27 March 2013 AMARULA/Marulablu, ref. 47; BGH I ZR 15/14 of 23 September 2015 Amplidect/ampliteq, ref. 52; BGH I ZR 195/17 of 7 March 2019 SAM, ref. 33.

    ↩

  130. Even further BGHZ 156, 250 Marktführerschaft.

    ↩

  131. See also BGH I ZR 82/08 of 14 January 2010, ref. 23, with further references.

    ↩

  132. BGHZ 156, 250, 254 Market leadership; BGH I ZR 122/04 of 29 March 2007 Bundesdruckerei, ref. 36.

    ↩

  133. BGH I ZR 110/03 of 29 June 2006 Ichthyol II, ref. 27; BGH I ZR 123/05 of 30 April 2008 Rillenkoffer, ref. 34; BGH I ZR 101/15 of 3 November 2016 MICRO COTTON, ref. 48.

    ↩

  134. BGH I ZR 228/10 of 13 June 2012 Stadtwerke Braunschweig, ref. 19; BGH I ZB 65/13 of 9 July 2015 Nivea-Blau, ref. 21; BGH I ZB 43/15 of 9 November 2016 Stadtwerke Bremen, ref. 15.

    ↩

  135. On intuitive judgements, see Strack/Martin/Schwarz, European Journal of Social Psychology 18 (1988), p. 429 (onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.2420180505/abstract).

    ↩

  136. Visser, p. 1923.

    ↩