RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE IP/Q2/ISL/1
21January 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-0214)
Original: English Council forTrade-Related Aspects
ofIntellectual Property Rights
REVIEW OFLEGISLATION ONTRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL
INDICATIONS AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
Iceland1
Thepresent document reproduces theintroductory statement made bythedelegation ofIceland
inthereviewoflegislationontrademarks,geographicalindicationsandindustrialdesignsattheCouncil's
meeting of11-15 November 19962,thequestions puttoitandtheresponses given.
_______________
I. INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
Ofthelawsandregulations notified byIceland under Article 63.2oftheTRIPS Agreement,
there aretwoActsofparticular relevance tothisreview process.
TheTrade Marks Act,No.47waspassed in1968 andhassince beenamended in1984, 1993
and1996. Theamendment made earlier thisyearrelates topriority. Members mayhavenoticed reading
ourgeneral notification (document IP/N/1/ISL/1) thattheTrade Marks Actiscurrently under revision.
Themain amendments asconcerns theTRIPS Agreement relate togeographical indications andthe
constitution ofatrademark. Ishallreturn tothese amendments inmore detail inproviding answers
tothequestions posed bytheUnited States.
Toprovide abriefdescription, theTrade Marks Actisdivided intoninechapters. Chapter I
contains general provisions; Chapter IIprovisions ontheregistration oftrademarks; Chapter III
provisions onthecancellation ofregistrations; Chapter IVspecial provisions relating totheregistration
offoreign trademarks; Chapter Vdeals withassignment, licences andsoforth; Chapter VIwiththe
prohibition ontheuseofdeceptive trademarks; Chapter VIIcontains provisions regarding legal
protection; Chapter VIIIdeals withcollective marks; andChapter IXwithmiscellaneous provisions.
1Asregards lawsandregulations relevant totheareas under review asnotified byIceland under Article 63.2
oftheAgreement reference ismade todocuments IP/N/1/ISL/1, IP/N/1/ISL/T/1, IP/N/1/ISL/D/1-2 and
IP/N/1/ISL/I/1-2 .
2Theminutes ofthemeeting have been circulated indocument IP/C/M/11.IP/Q2/ISL/1
Page2
TheDesign Protection Act,No.48waspassed in1993. Itwasamended byActNo.36earlier this
yeartoenable theextension ofpriority toWTO Members.
TheDesign Protection Actisdivided intoeightsections. Section Icontains general provisions;
Section IIpertains totheregistration authorities; Section IIIdeals withapplications andregistration;
Section IVwiththetermofprotection andrenewal; Section Vcontains provisions ondeclaration of
invalidity andtherightofappeal; Section VIprovisions ontransfer, licences, etc.;Section VIIpertains
topunishment, sanctions, etc.;andSection VIIIcontains miscellaneous provisions.
II. REPLY TOTHE GENERAL QUESTION CONCERNING PRIORITY RIGHTS3
Doesyourcountry recognize arightofpriority onthebasisofanearlier trademark application
filedinanyother WTO Member byanational ofaWTO Member?
Iceland recognizes arightofpriority onthebasis ofanearlier trademark application filedin
another WTO Member byanational ofaWTO Member. Thisrecognition isexplicitly stated in
Regulations No.436/1990 andNo.287/1996 (seedocument IP/N/1/ISL/1) andinanamendment made
earlier thisyeartoArticle 30oftheTrade Marks Act. Members willfindthisamendment inPartII
ofActNo.36/1996, asnotified (document IP/N/1/ISL/I/1).
III. REPLIES TOQUESTIONS POSED BYTHE UNITED STATES
1. Please explain whether thenature ofthegoods orservices towhich atrademark istobeapplied
canserve asanobstacle totheregistration ofthemark under Iceland ’slaw. Ifso,please identify
andexplain thesubject matter excluded under thisauthority, andtherelative provisions ofIceland ’s
lawthatserve asabasis forthese exclusions.
Thenature ofthegoods orservices towhich atrademark istobeapplied maynotserve as
anobstacle totheregistration ofthemark under Icelandic law.
2. Please explain whether Iceland ’strademark lawpermits thefiling ofanapplication toregister
atrademark based onanintention tousethemark, rather thanupon abasis ofactual use. Ifnot,
please explain howthispractice isconsistent withTRIPS Article 15.3.
Actual useofatrademark isnotacondition forfiling anapplication forregistration.
According totheIcelandic Trademark Act,persons, firms orcompanies canobtain anexclusive
righttouseatrademark byregistration, useorifthemark hasbecome established.
3. Itisunclear whether Iceland ’strademark lawpermits registration ofcolour marks. Please
indicate whether colour marks arecapable ofconstituting atrademark under Iceland ’strademark law
and,ifso,under whatauthority.
Colour marks fallunder thescope ofArticle 1(2)oftheIcelandic Trademark Act. However,
atrademark cannot beregistered ifitisnotsuitable fordistinguishing thegoods oftheproprietor from
those ofothers, according toArticle 13.
3Atthemeeting oftheTRIPS Council of11-15 November 1996, Members agreed torespond tothisquestion
inthecontext ofthepresent review (document IP/C/M/11, paragraph 43).IP/Q2/ISL/1
Page3
There aremany figurative marks registered incolour inIceland butthedistinctiveness ofthe
colours assuchisuncertain.
4. Article 1ofIceland ’sTrademark Actstates thattrademarks mayconsist ofsymbols thatcan
beprinted. Please explain whether trademarks thatarevisually perceptible butwhich arenotprinted
canberegistered.
According toArticle 1oftheIcelandic Trademark ActinEnglish translation, trademarks may
consist ofanytypeofsymbol which canbe"printed". More precise translation would be"published
inprint" or"represented graphically" asinthetrademark lawsoftheother Nordic countries.
Theinterpretation ofthisprovision inIceland isthatitisnecessary tobeabletoshow a
trademark inprintsothatitcanbepublished. Butitisnotacondition thatthetrademark assuchis
printed. Itisforexample possible toregister theshape ofgoods oroftheirpackaging iftheapplicant
hasprovided apicture ofthemark. TheIcelandic language doesnothaveaprecise word fordescribing
"represented graphically"; theword "printed" hasbeenusedinstead.
Aproposal foranewTrademark Acthasnowbeenprepared. Theproposal isexpected to
beapproved byParliament before theendofthisyearandenterintoforceon1January 1997. Article 1
hasbeenchanged intheproposed newlawandthecondition isthatasignshallbevisually perceptible.
5. Please explain whether apresumption oflikelihood ofconfusion isprovided through Iceland ’s
lawinthedetermination ofconfusing similarity involving identical marks thatareusedonidentical
goods, asrequired byTRIPS Article 16.1. Ifso,please identify andexplain thelegal basis forthis
presumption.
Incaseoftheuseofanidentical signforidentical goods orservices, alikelihood ofconfusion
ispresumed according totheIcelandic Trademark Act.Theproprietor doesnothavetoprove likelihood
ofconfusion ineachparticular casewhere anidentical signisusedforidentical goods orservices.
Thisfollows from Article 4andArticle 6oftheTrademark Actandalsofrom Article 14(6).
6. Please explain whether Iceland ’slawprotects trademarks inaccordance withTRIPS Article
16.3and,ifso,identify theprovision thatprovides thisprotection.
There isnospecific provision intheIcelandic Trademark Actrelating towell-known marks.
However, thisdoesnotmean thatwell-known marks arenotafforded protection intheActinaccordance
withTRIPS Article 16.3.
According toArticle 3(3),itisprohibited touseanymark which isliable tobeconfused with
atrademark already inuseinIceland orabroad iftheonewhointends tousethemark knows themark
orought tohaveknown it.
According toArticle 14(7), atrademark shallnotberegistered ifitisliable tobeconfused
withamark which wasinuseabroad onthefiling dateoftheapplication andremains inuse,provided
thatatthedateoftheapplication theapplicant knew themark orought tohaveknown it.Thisprovision
provides forbroad protection formarks inother countries.IP/Q2/ISL/1
Page4
[Follow-up question posed bytheUnited States]
DoesthenewTrademark ActofIceland, which isexpected toenterintoforceon1January 1997,
contain specific provisions regarding theprotection ofwell-known marks? Ifso,whatprovisions of
thelawwillapply?
Iceland doesnotyethaveanewTrade Mark Act.Aproposal forsuchanewActis,however,
being submitted toParliament laterthisweek intheexpectation thatitcanenter intoforce on
1January 1997.
Theproposal assubmitted toParliament contains specific provisions regarding theprotection
ofwell-known marks. Inproviding protection forunregistered well-known marks, Article 14(7) of
theproposed newActstipulates thatatrademark shallnotberegistered ifthere isanylikelihood of
confusion withatrademark thatwasconsidered wellknown inIceland when theapplication for
registration wasfiled. Thisapplies alsotoproducts orservices which arenotsimilar tothose inrespect
ofwhich atrademark isregistered, inaccordance withtheprovisions ofArticle 16.3oftheTRIPS
Agreement.
ThenewTrade Mark Actwillbenotified totheTRIPS Council attheappropriate time.
7. Article 25aofIceland ’sTrademark Actpermits theproprietor ofatrademark topresent “valid
reasons ”forcontinued registration despite non-use ofatrademark. Please explain thetypes of
circumstances thatwould besufficient tosatisfy thisprovision, including, where relevant, results of
administrative orjudicial decisions addressing thisissue.
Article 25awasintroduced intotheIcelandic Trademark Actwhen itwasamended byAct
No.67/1993, of7May1993, which entered intoforce on1January 1994.
Theexplanatory textinActNo.67/1993 contains some examples ofcircumstances orsituations
thatwould notconstitute "valid reasons" forcontinued registration despite non-use ofatrademark.
These examples arelackoffunds, lackofemployees, difficulties inobtaining material ordifficulties
inmarketing theproduct. Ifhowever these difficulties areduetocircumstances orsituations which
theproprietor cannot control, forexample actsofwar(i.e.force majeure), these could beconsidered
valid reasons.
Noadministrative orjudicial decisions addressing thisissuehavebeenpassed todate,andnone
canbeexpected before 1999 attheearliest.
[Follow-up question posed bytheUnited States]
WhydoesIceland notexpect anadministrative orjudicial decision astowhatwould constitute
"valid reasons" forcontinued registration despite non-use ofatrademark until1999 attheearliest?
Article 25awasintroduced intotheIcelandic Trade Mark Actbyanamendment which entered
intoforce on1January 1994. Iceland doesnotexpect anydecisions before 1999forthesimple reason
thatthefive-year period ofnon-use stipulated inArticle 25awillnothavepassed before thattime.
8. Please explain whether Iceland ’strademark lawimposes timelimits onactions tocancel
trademark registrations thathavebeenobtained bymeans offraud orbadfaith.
No,there arenotimelimits onsuchactions.IP/Q2/ISL/1
Page5
9. TRIPS Article 20provides thattheuseofatrademark shall notbeencumbered byspecial
requirements. However, Article 10ofIceland ’sTrademark Actstates thatunder certain circumstances
“marks maybeusedonlyinaspecial manner, forexample inaparticular design orwiththeaddition
ofaplace name ...”.Please explain howthisprovision complies withTRIPS Article 20.
According toArticle 10oftheIcelandic Trademark Act,theCourts maydecide inthecases
setoutinArticles 8and9-ifitisconsidered reasonable -thattrademarks maybeusedonlyinaspecial
manner. Thisisonlyincases where itisnecessary toprevent anylikelihood ofconfusion andwhere
itisfound reasonable. According toArticle 20oftheTRIPS Agreement theuseofatrademark shall
"notbeunjustifiably encumbered byspecial requirements". Intheopinion ofIceland, thisprovision
intheTRIPS Agreement doesnotprohibit aprovision likeArticle 10oftheIcelandic Trademark Act,
because oftheword "unjustifiably".
10. Please explain howgeographical indications areprotected under theIcelandic law,asrequired
byTRIPS Articles 22and23.
Iceland hasnospecific legislation concerning geographical indications, buttheTrademark Act
andtheCompetition Actcontain provisions thatprotect suchindications asrequired bytheTRIPS
Agreement. Inpractice, geographical indications aregranted extensive protection.
According toArticle 14(2) oftheIcelandic Trademark Act,atrademark shallnotberegistered
ifthemark islikely todeceive andinArticle 36theuseofdeceptive signs isprohibited.
Article 21oftheCompetition Actprohibits theprovision ofincorrect, incomplete ormisleading
information byadvertisement orbyother means ortheemployment ofother similar business methods
possessing suchcharacteristics, ifsuchadvertisements ormethods aresuited toinfluence thedemand
orsupply ofgoods, realproperty, services orother objects oftrade offered inthecourse ofbusiness
operation towhich theCompetition Actapplies.
Theproposal foranewTrademark Actcontains thefollowing addition toArticle 14(2): "...
forexample regarding thenature, quality ororigin ofthegoods". Furthermore, inorder toensure
fullcompliance withtherequirement ofArticle 23oftheTRIPS Agreement, anewparagraph 14(3)
concerning geographical indications forwines andspirits hasbeenadded toArticle 14.
11. Please describe themethods bywhich industrial designs areprotected inIceland, inparticular:
(a) theformorforms ofintellectual property usedtoprotect thedesign
(e.g., patent, copyright, suigeneris);
(b) theconditions thatmustbesatisfied toobtain thegrant ofsuchprotection
(e.g., whether designs mustbenewororiginal andtheparameters ofthese concepts),
andabriefdescription oftheregistration orgranting procedure;
(c) thenature oftherights granted andthetermofprotection provided;
(d) thenature ofremedies available totheowner ofeachtypeofprotection, including
adescription oftheconditions thatmaybeimposed (e.g., whether commercial use
isrequired); and
(e) whether anyexceptions toprotection orrights existforeachtypeofintellectual property
involved.IP/Q2/ISL/1
Page6
InIceland wehave aspecial lawfortheprotection ofindustrial designs, theDesign
Protection Act,No.48from 1993 which entered intoforce on21May1994.
(a) TheIcelandic Design Protection Actestablishes asuigeneris system fortheprotection of
industrial designs.
(b) Adesign hastobedistinctive andArticle 2(2)defines whatisconsidered tobeadistinctive
design. Adesign isconsidered distinctive ifithasnotbeenmade accessible toknowledgeable
persons inthefieldconcerned before thedatesreferred inArticle 6,andifitsoverall impression
from theuser'spoint ofviewdiffers significantly from designs withwhich theyarealready
familiar. Adesign hastofulfil these twoconditions tobeprotected. Adesign 'soverall
impression hastobedistinctive; itisnotenough toaddsomething newtoadesign ifitdoes
notchange theoverall impression from theuser'spoint ofview.
Design protection canbeobtained intwoways: byregistration andbymaking theproduct
accessible tothepublic. There isnoexofficio examination bytheregistration authorities as
todistinctiveness orpriorrights, butaccording toArticle 18aninvestigation mayberequired
todetermine whether acertain design isidentical orsimilar toanother design.
(c) Article 5(1)oftheDesign Protection Actcontains adescription ofthenature oftherights granted
byregistration andArticle 5(2)pertains totheunregistered protection.
Registered protection ofadesign shalllastuptofiveyears fromthedayonwhich theapplication
forregistration wasfiled. Registration mayberenewed forperiods offiveyears eachupto
atotaltermofprotection of25years (Article 23).
Anunregistered design shallenjoy protection foraperiod oftwoyears from thedateitwas
firstmade accessible tothepublic (Article 22).
(d) InSection VoftheDesign Protection Act,there areprovisions concerning declaration of
invalidity andtheright ofappeal. Protection ofadesign (registered andunregistered) can
bedeclared invalid bythecourts (Article 25).Registered design protection canalsobedeclared
invalid bytheregistration authorities (Article 26).
InSection VIIthere areprovisions concerning punishment, sanctions etc. According to
Article 35aninjunction maybeissued. Therules oncriminal proceedings apply tolegal
proceedings under Article 36.Fines, detention orimprisonment uptothree months isthe
punishment foranyone whoonpurpose infringes against theexclusive rights conveyed bythe
protection ofadesign. According toArticle 37,anyone whoonpurpose orthrough negligence
infringes therighttodesign protection shallpayreasonable compensation fortheexploitation
andforother damages.
(e) There arenoexceptions.
12. Please explain howtextile designs areprotected under yourlaw.
According toArticle 1oftheDesign Protection Act, adesign canbethetwo- and
three-dimensional appearance ofaproduct oritsdecoration. Textile designs arethusprotected under
theDesign Protection Act.