RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE IP/Q2/FIN/1
12August 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-3382)
Original: English Council forTrade-Related Aspects
ofIntellectual Property
REVIEW OFLEGISLATION ONTRADEMARKS, GEOGRAPHICAL
INDICATIONS AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
Finland1
ThepresentdocumentreproducesthequestionsputtothedelegationofFinlandandtheresponses
given inthereview oflegislation ontrademarks, geographical indications andindustrial designs at
theCouncil 'smeeting of11-15 November 1996.2
_______________
I. REPLY TOTHE GENERAL QUESTION CONCERNING PRIORITY RIGHTS3
Doesyourcountry recognize arightofpriority onthebasisofanearlier trademark application
filedinanyother WTO Member byanational ofaWTO Member?
Yes. According totheDecree amending Section 17oftheFinnish Trademarks Decree, which
wasissued on22December 1995 andentered intoforce on1January 1996, thesixmonths priority
timeisaccepted toallapplications firstfiledinamember oftheParis Convention oraMember of
theWTO.
II. REPLIES TOQUESTIONS POSED BYTHE UNITED STATES
1. Article 1oftheFinnish Trademarks Actsetsforththetypes ofsigns thatarecapable ofbeing
protected asatrademark. Thislistofsigns doesnotinclude colour marks. Please indicate whether
colour marks arecapable ofconstituting atrademark under Finland ’strademark law,andifso,under
whatauthority.
Article 1.2oftheFinnish Trademarks Actcontains thegeneral definition ofatrademark.
According toit,atrademark maybeanykindofmark thatcanberepresented graphically andbymeans
ofwhich goods marketed inbusiness canbedistinguished fromthose ofothers. Following thedefinition
theArticle setsforthalistofexamples ofwhatatrademark inparticular mayconsist of(words, figures,
letters, numerals ortheshape ofgoods oroftheirpackage). Graphic representation isaverywide
1Asregards lawsandregulations relevant totheareas under review asnotified byFinland, reference ismade todocument
IP/N/1/FIN/1.
2Theminutes ofthismeeting arecontained indocument IP/C/M/11.
3Atthemeeting oftheTRIPS Council of11-15 November 1996, Members agreed torespond tothisquestion inthe
context ofthepresent review (document IP/C/M/11, paragraph 43).IP/Q2/FIN/1
Page2
concept. Itmayinclude, forexample, musical jingles, slogans orcolours. Thisisexplicitly stated
inthepreparatory documents oftheBillNo.39of25January 1993, whereby theArticle wasamended
inpreparation fortheEuropean Economic Area(EEA). Thismeans, thatunder Finland 'strademark
lawcolour marks arecapable ofconstituting aregistrable trademark, provided thattheyfulfill the
requirements ofdistinctiveness.
2. Please explain whether thenature ofgoods orservices towhich atrademark istobeapplied
canserve asanobstacle totheregistration ofthemark under Finnish law. Ifso,please identify and
explain thesubject matter excluded under thisauthority, therelative provisions oftheFinnish lawthat
serve asabasis forthese exclusions, andhowthispractice complies withTRIPS Article 15.4.
According toArticle 7oftheParis Convention, which Finland isamember of,"thequality
ofthegood" maynotserve asanobstacle fortheregistration ofatrademark. Although Finnish
trademark lawdoesnotcontain ananalogous provision, Finland isobliged bytheParis Convention
totakenoticeoftheabove-mentionedprovision.TheFinnishTrademarksActdoesnotcontainprovisions
under which thenature ofthegoods orservices could serve asanobstacle totheregistration ofthe
mark.
3. Article 26oftheFinnish Trademarks Actallows theproprietor ofatrademark topresent "proper
reasons" tojustify continued registration despite non-use ofatrademark. Please explain thetypes of
circumstances thatwould besufficient tosatisfy thisprovision, including, where relevant, results of
administrative orjudicial decisions addressing thisissue.
Thepreparatory documents relating toArticle 26oftheFinnish Trademarks Act(theBill
mentioned intheanswer toUSquestion 1above) donotspecify thesituations inwhich theholder of
atrademark mayinvoke proper reasons forthenon-use ofthetrademark. Itremains thusforthecourt
toultimately define theconcept of"proper reasons". There areatpresent noadministrative orjudicial
decisions addressing theissue. Thegeneral principle, however, isthatsituations which occur
independently oftheholder 'swillorability, suchaswarorother crisis, import orexport restrictions,
orapending administrative decision, e.g.amarketing licence forapharmaceutical orchemical product,
mayform suchreasons.
4. Please explain howunregistered well-known marks areprotected inFinland, asrequired by
TRIPS Articles 16.2and16.3.
According toArticle 6.2oftheFinnish Trademarks Act,theconfusability ofsymbols canbe
referred toinfavour ofsuchsymbol which hasareputation inthiscountry, iftheuseofasymbol
ofanother without duecause would mean taking unfair advantage of,orbeing detrimental tothe
distinctive character orthereputation oftheearlier mark. Usually theowner ofthewell-known mark
reacts tothiskindofunfair practice, forexample intheform ofopposition.
5. TRIPS Article 20provides thattheuseofatrademark shall notbeencumbered byspecial
requirements. However, Article 10oftheFinnish Trademarks Actstates that"itmaybedecided where
reasonable, that...thetrade symbols mayonlybeusedinaspecific manner" incertain situations
where aregistered trademark hasco-existed withanunregistered trademark foraperiod oftime. Please
explain howthisprovision ofFinnish lawcomplies withTRIPS Article 20.
Article 10oftheFinnish Trademarks Actrefers tocases where theuserofatrademark has
neglected hispossibility toprevent another party within areasonable timefrom using aconfusable
mark. Inthose situations, therights maycontinue toco-exist. However, forconsumers tobeable
toidentify anddistinguish between products, some kindofclarification mayberequested tobeaddedIP/Q2/FIN/1
Page3
tothemark. Thisprovision serves theinterest oftheright-owners andisnotarequirement which
unjustifiably encumbers theuseofatrademark.
6. PleaseexplainwhetherFinnishtrademarklawestablishesapresumptionoflikelihoodofconfusion
inthedetermination ofconfusing similarity incases where identical marks areusedonidentical goods,
asrequired byTRIPS Article 16.1. Ifso,please identify andexplain thelegalbasisforthispresumption,
andexplain theroleofArticle 14.6oftheFinnish Trademark Actinthisregard.
According toArticle 14.1, point 6,amark maynotberegistered ifitisliable tobeconfused
withanidentical mark ofanother, which wasalready registered foridentical goods atthetimewhen
registration issought. Theprovision initself establishes apresumption oflikelihood ofconfusion,
although itisnotexplicitly stated init.
[Follow-up question from theUS]
Where aregistered trademark isusedontheidentical goods forwhich itisregistered bysomeone
other thantheregistrant oritslicensee, willtheFinnish courts impose apresumption ofconfusion that
mustbeovercome bytheuser?
Yes,where aregistered trademark isusedontheidentical goods forwhich itisregistered by
someoneotherthantheregistrantoritslicensee,theFinnishcourtsdoimposeapresumptionofconfusion
thatmust beovercome bytheuser.
7. Please explain howgeographical indications areprotected under Finland ’slaw,asrequired
byTRIPS Articles 22and23.
ProtectionofgeographicalindicationsinFinlandisbasedontheimplementationoftheRegulation
ontheprotection ofgeographical indications anddesignations oforigin (EEC No.2081/92) andthe
supplementary provisions toit.TheMinistry ofAgriculture andForestry has,byvirtue oftheAct
onimplementation ofthecommon agricultural policy oftheEC(No.1100/94), given outaDecision
ontheminimum protection ofagricultural products andfoodstuffs (No.933/95), aswellasaDecision
oncertificates concerning special character ofagricultural products andfoodstuffs (No.934/1995) (the
translations ofthetitles oftheenactments areunofficial).
8. TheEuropeanCouncilRegulationontheprotectionofgeographicalindicationsanddesignations
oforigin specifically excludes protection forwines andspirits. Inviewofthis,please explain how
Finland protects geographical indications foruseonwines andspirits inaccordance withTRIPS
Article 23.Please explain whether Finland hasimplemented anylawsorregulations tocomply with
therequirements ofanyrelevant Council Regulations.
Geographical indications enjoy general protection under theConsumer Protection Act
(No.38/1978). Thepurpose ofthisActistodiscourage anyactswhich areinappropriate inrelation
toconsumers. Tothiseffect, theActcontains various provisions aiming atprohibiting suchacts.
Inparticular, Sections 1and2contain prohibitions touseinmarketing allegations orother statements
whicharecontrarytogoodpracticeorwhichmayberegardedasmisleadingmarketing.Theseprovisions
canbeapplied, forexample, incases where aproduct hasbeenreleased onthemarket withalabel
orasignwhich could bemisleading tothepublic. Similarly, these provisions canbeapplied when
misleading information ofthetype,quantity, quality, origin orother characteristics oftheproduct has
beengiven toconsumers.
When these prohibitions areviolated, theMarket Court mayissue orders, alsointerimistic
ones, prohibitions orfinesofthecontinuation ofsuchviolations. Ifsuchanorder isnotobeyed, aIP/Q2/FIN/1
Page4
neworder maybeissued. Inaddition, compensation fordamages shallbepaidforviolations ofsuch
aprohibition.
Inaddition totheprotection given under theConsumer Protection Act,theFinnish Foodstuffs
Act(No.351/95) contains aprohibition togivemisleading information onfoodstuffs. Itisregulated
inSection 6oftheFoodstuffs Actthattruthful andsufficient information onfoodstuffs hastobegiven
inapackage, anadvertisement orabrochure oftheproduct. TheMinistry ofTrade andIndustry may
issue more detailed provisions onindications andinformation, when necessary. Thepunishments of
theviolation oftheFoodstuffs Actaremuch thesame asregulated intheConsumer Protection Act.
Indications relating towines andspirits enjoy protection under theAlcohol Act(No.1143/94).
Section 43prescribes theresponsibility oftheproducer andtheimporter. According tothisprovision,
theproducer andtheimporter shallanswer forthequality andcomposition ofthealcoholic beverages
delivered bythemforconsumption, aswellasforthecircumstance thattheproduct anditslabelling,
andother presentation ofit,areincompliance withtheprovisions andregulations issued. According
toSection 49oftheAlcohol Act,thealcoholic beverages mayberemoved from themarket, ifthe
product oritspresentation arecontrary totheprovisions andregulations concerning it.
[Follow-up question from theUS]
Dotheprovisions andregulations concerning theAlcohol Actspecifically prohibit theuseof
geographical indications oforigin onsuchproducts, where those products donotactually originate
inthatgeographical location?
Provisions andregulations concerning alcoholic beverages include therelevant ECRegulations
whichimplementTRIPSArticle23(Regulation3290/94modifyingRegulation822/87concerningwines;
Regulation3378/94modifyingtheprovisionsconcerningspiritsandaromatizedwines).TheRegulations
contain specific provisions onprohibition oftheuseofgeographical indications oforigin onsuch
products, where those products donotactually originate inthatgeographical location.
9. Please describe themethods bywhich industrial designs areprotected inFinland, 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 a
description oftheconditions thatmaybeimposed (e.g., whether commercial useis
required); and
(e) whether anyexceptions toprotection orrights existforeachtypeofintellectual property
involved.IP/Q2/FIN/1
Page5
(a) InFinland industrial designs are,asageneral rule,protected byregistration according tothe
Registered Designs Act(No.221of12March 1971, assubsequently amended).4Theprotection
ofthedesign mayalsobebased ontheCopyright Act,provided thatthework fulfills acertain
level oforiginality, orbytheTrademarks Act,provided thatthework canbedistinguished
fromthose ofothers (seeanswer toUSquestion 1above). Incertain situations, theprotection
mayalsobebased onutility model law(novelty, inventive step,cleardistinctiveness), patent
law(novelty, inventive step,industrial applicability, cleardistinctiveness) andrulesonunfair
competition. These forms ofprotection arenotmutually exclusive.
(b) Theconditions thatmust besatisfied toobtain thegrant ofdesign protection are:
(1) Novelty: thedesign shallnotbemade public before thedateoftheapplication for
registration orthedatefrom which priority isclaimed;
(2) Substantial difference: thedesign shallsubstantially differ fromwhathasbecome known
before thedateofapplication;
(3) Creativity:commonorsimpledesignsdonotobtainregistration.Outsideofregistration
arethereby left,forexample, basic geometric shapes (circles, squares, etc.).
Anyearlier design thathasbecome known before theapplication forregistration, whether by
reproduction, exhibition, offering forsale,orotherwise, maybeanobstacle forregistration.
Applications forregistration aresubject toexamination offormal (payment offees,power of
attorney, assignments) aswellassubstantive conditions. Thisnovelty examination is,however,
restricted toearlier registered designs andpending applications.
(c) Therightgranted bytheregistration ofadesign gives theowner ofitanexclusive right, which
implies that,without theowner 'sconsent, noonemayexploit thedesign inthecourse oftrade
byproducing, importing, offering, putting onthemarket, assigning orhiring outanarticle
which doesnotsubstantially differ fromthedesign orwhich includes something thatdoesnot
substantially differ from thedesign.
TheDesign Actprovides fortheprotection forfiveyears from thedateofapplication of
registration. Theregistration may berenewed fortwoadditional five-year periods.
Consequently themaximum termofprotection is15years.
(d) Anyone who,intentionally orthrough negligence, infringes adesign isliable topayreasonable
compensation fortheuseofthedesign, aswellascompensation forthefurther damage. The
amount ofcompensation awarded depends upon thedegree ofnegligence. Even where the
infringement does notcontain anyintention ornegligence, theinfringer isliable topay
compensation fortheuseofthedesign, insofar assuchcompensation maybefound reasonable.
Where theinfringement wasintentional, theactmaybepunishable asacrime. Thepenalty
fordeliberate infringement isafineand/or imprisonment ofuptosixmonths. Thecourt may
alsoorder theinfringing material tobedestroyed, altered ortobeconveyed totheinjured party
against compensation, aswellassuspensive measures suchasconfiscation orseizure. This
applies toallforms ofprotection mentioned above under (a).
4Thetextofthislawcanbefound indocument IP/N/1/FIN/D/1.IP/Q2/FIN/1
Page6
(e) IntheFinnish industrial property legislation, theruleofadvance usemakes anexemption to
protection ofrights. Anyperson whohas,inthecourse oftrade, beenusing ortaken substantial
stepstouseadesign atthetimetheapplication forregistration wasmade, maynotwithstanding
another 'srighttothedesign continue suchuse,provided thatsuchusedidnotentail amanifest
abuse.
Another exemption iscontained inArticle 7oftheRegistered Designs Act.TheArticle states
thatitmaybeprovided bydecree thatspare parts andaccessories foraircraft, regardless of
theprotection ofdesigns, maybeimported toFinland fortherepair ofaircraft belonging to
aforeign country inwhich corresponding benefits areaccorded toFinnish aircraft. Suchdecree
hasnotbeenpassed andtheArticle hasbecome adeadletter.
10. Please explain howtextile designs areprotected under yourlaw.
There arenoparticular provisions concerning textile designs intheFinnish Registered Designs
Act. Thesame rulesthatareapplied toother designs, apply alsototheprotection oftextile designs.
III. REPLIES TOQUESTIONS POSED BYJAPAN
1. Since itisnotclearly stipulated intheDesign Protection Actthattextile designs areprotected
inconformity withtheTRIPS Agreement, please explain under which provision oftheActorother
copyright related lawthese designs areprotected. Moreover, tomake surethattheopportunity to
seekandobtain protection fortextile designs isnotimpaired unreasonably, please explain yoursystem
orpractice particularly withregard tocost,examination orpublication (cf.paragraph 2ofArticle
25oftheTRIPS Agreement).
InFinland industrial designs are,asageneral rule,protected byregistration according tothe
Registered Designs Act(No.221/71, assubsequently amended). Theprotection ofthedesign may
alsobebased ontheCopyright Act,provided thatthework fulfills acertain leveloforiginality, or
bytheTrademarks Act,provided thatthework canbedistinguished fromthose ofothers (seeanswer
toUSquestion 1above). Other possible forms ofprotection incertain situations areutility model
law(novelty, inventive step, clear distinctiveness), patent law(novelty, inventive step, industrial
applicability, clear distinctiveness) andrules onunfair competition. These forms ofprotection are
notmutually exclusive.
There arenoparticular provisions concerning textile designs intheFinnish Registered Designs
Act. Thesame rulesthatareapplied toother designs, apply alsototheprotection oftextile designs.
Theaverage period fortheexamination ofanapplication forregistration ofadesign isten
months. Concerning thefeescollected bytheregistration authority, asanexample maybepresented
thatforthefirstfiveyears thebasic registration feeisFIM780,which, added bythepublication fee
(2xFIM180), means FIM228ayear.
2. Theword"selling" isnotincluded inthescope oftherighttoadesign provided forinSection 5
oftheDesignProtectionAct.Iftheword"assigning"correspondstotheword"selling",pleaseelaborate
onthedifference between thetwo(cf.paragraph 1ofArticle 26oftheTRIPS Agreement).
Theconcept ofassigning includes alsoselling.IP/Q2/FIN/1
Page7
3. Inyourcountry, itisstipulated inSection 7oftheDesign Protection Actthatimportations
ofspare parts andaccessories tobeusedfortherepair ofaircraft maybeexcluded fromtherightto
adesign. Please explain itsconsistency withparagraph 2ofArticle 26oftheTRIPS Agreement.
Article 7oftheRegistered Designs Actstates, thatitmaybeprovided byadecree thatspare
partsandaccessories foraircraft, regardless oftheprotection ofdesigns, maybeimported toFinland
fortherepair ofaircraft belonging toaforeign country inwhich corresponding benefits areaccorded
toFinnish aircraft. Such decree hasnotbeenpassed andtheArticle hasbecome adeadletter.
4. Inyourcountry, thefirstduration ofprotection available islessthantenyears, andanyrenewal
thereafter cannot berequested atthetimeofregistration. Itmayhappen, therefore, thattheduration
ofprotection islessthantenyears whenthefirstduration haslapsed andtherestoration isnotpermitted
afterwards. Would thisnotbecontrary tothespirit ofparagraph 3ofArticle 26oftheTRIPS
Agreement?
TheFinnish Registered Designs Actprovides fortheprotection forfiveyears from thedate
ofapplication ofregistration. Theregistration mayberenewed fortwoadditional five-year periods.
Consequently, themaximum termofprotection is15years. Therequest forrenewal maybemade
ayearbefore thetermination oftheregistration aswellasuntilsixmonths afterthetermination. The
renewalprocessisverysimple.Theregistrationauthoritycontrolsthattherenewalfeeandotherpossible
feeshavebeenpaidandmakes thenecessary indications totheregister (concerning therenewal, owner
ofthedesign ortheattorney), afterwhich therenewal decision isfiledtotheowner ofthedesign.
Nonovelty examination isdoneduring therenewal process.