PARTAGER

Nocan Vs/ Minitec

The cour de Cassation decided a case on February 20, 2007 which confirms a line of cases issued since 2006 concerning the proof of the originality of a creation. The company, Nocan, is the owner of a model and claims the protection of an old article 511-3 of the CPI against the company, Minitec. In…

Lire la suite
PARTAGER

ALREX vs./ ARTEX

  ALREX vs./ ARTEX In the ALREX vs./ ARTEX case, further to the appeal filed against the European Court of First Instance decision, the Advocate General gave his opinion: The acquisition decision is made when the medicine is prescribed by professionals. Thus, when a comparison is made between two pharmaceuticals available only on prescription the…

Lire la suite
PARTAGER

Please answer the Iphone tm

The dispute between Apple and Cisco relating to the trademark IPHONE was just settled on February 21, 2007.  The two companies were opposing since Apple had launched its new widescreen mobile phone on January, 9, 2007, one month after Linksys ( a Cisco subsidiary) had launched its Iphone.

Lire la suite
PARTAGER

Mars VS Nars

VS./ On February 8, 2007, the CFI confirmed that these marks were phonetically identical in their most significant parts. However, the prominent size and the black and white colours of the « mars » mark made the device stand out and « mars » referred to that device (contrary to the « nars » trademark). Conceptually, the marks did not share…

Lire la suite
PARTAGER

Polar VS Polaris

POLAR vs./ On January 8, 2007, the Second Board of Appeal regarded these marks as different. The signs are unequal but short in length and only the trademark POLARIS includes a figurative element. The Board retained the difference in the last syllable as significant. Intellectually, POLAR refers to the Earth pole, whereas POLARIS has no…

Lire la suite