The TRIPS Agreement,^[1] an additional agreement of the WTO, has found the greatest acceptance worldwide of all the IP rights regulations.^[2] There, Art. 15 et seq. with central substantive provisions - for example, on the registrability of trade marks, the scope of their protection, the grace period for non-use and renewal - serve to achieve a certain minimum harmonisation of the trademark rights of WTO members. Furthermore, Art. 41 ff. of the TRIPS Agreement contains central procedural rules for the enforcement of intellectual property rights, which in Germany have led, above all, to an improvement in the possibilities for enforcing rights in the context of preliminary legal protection. However, the TRIPS Agreement is not necessarily - but voluntarily^[3] - directly applicable,^[4] but can only influence the interpretation of other provisions.
The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (PC) is of similar international importance to the TRIPS Agreement,^[5] which pursues the goal of granting certain minimum standards. The importance of the PC was later enhanced by the fact that Article 2(1) TRIPS requires all TRIPS members to take into account the central provisions of the PC. The central provisions of the PC thus also enjoy almost worldwide validity. In substantive terms, the Paris Convention contains, in particular, provisions on the registrability of trade marks in the form of certain grounds for refusal. In addition, the Paris Convention provides special protection for particularly well-known (German 'notorisch bekannt') trade marks,^[6] protection for trade names^[7] and very specific claims tailored to international trade.^[8] However, like the TRIPS Agreement, the Paris Convention is not directly applicable,^[9] but is only relevant for the interpretation of other provisions.
Unlike the TRIPS Agreement and the Paris Convention, which serve to harmonise substantive trademark law internationally, the Madrid Agreement (MMA) and the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement (PMMA)^[10] created an independent system of international registration. The aim of these agreements is to facilitate international trademark applications.
Trademark Law Treaty (TLT) essentially aims to harmonise national formal requirements. For example, the formal requirements for a power of attorney for trade mark applications are harmonised. The TLT thus considerably facilitates international filing procedures. The Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks, which came into force on 16 March 2009 and in Germany on 20 September 2013, aims in the same direction, but goes further.^[11]
Finally, the Nice and Vienna classifications contain certain (partly binding) lists of recommendations. The Nice Classification and the Nice Agreement^[12] on Classification serve on this, the conceivable goods and services that can be claimed with a trademark application can be placed in a systematic order. For this purpose, 45 classes are available, which are organised by subject matter. The practical relevance of this classification is not only that it provides a systematic structure but also that the fees for the trade mark application increase with the number of classes.
For example, class 25 contains 'articles of clothing, footwear, headgear', and class 43 contains 'providing of food and drink; temporary accommodation'.
Unlike the Nice Classification, the Vienna Classification^[13] is on this point on incorporating certain figurative elements of the representation of trade marks into a searchable system.
For example, there is a number code (3) for animal figures or another, more specific number code (3.3.1) for horse figures.