Case C-237/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de Cassation (France) lodged on 3 June 2008 — Google France v Viaticum, Luteciel
Date: 2008-06-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, industrial counterfeiting, interpretation of the law, provision of services, registered trade mark, search engine

15.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/27

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de
Cassation (France) lodged on 3 June 2008 — Google France
v Viaticum, Luteciel

incur liability before it has been informed by the trade mark
proprietor of the unlawful use of the sign by the advertiser?

(Case C-237/08)

(2008/C 209/40)

Language of the case: French

(1) OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1.
(2) OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1.
(3) Directive 2000/31/EC of

the
Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information
in the Internal
in particular electronic commerce,
society services,
Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ 2000 L 178, p. 1).

the European Parliament and of

Referring court

Cour de Cassation (Commercial, Financial and Economic Divi-
sion)

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de
Cassation (France) lodged on 3 June 2008 — Google France
v CNRRH, Pierre-Alexis Thonet, Bruno Raboin, Tiger, a
franchisee of ‘Unicis’

(Case C-238/08)

(2008/C 209/41)

Language of the case: French

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Google France

Referring court

Respondent: Viaticum, Luteciel

Cour de Cassation (Commercial, Financial and Economic Divi-
sion)

Questions referred

1. Must Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of First Council Directive
89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws
of the Member States relating to trade marks (1) be inter-
preted as meaning that a provider of a paid referencing
service who makes available to advertisers keywords reprodu-
cing or imitating registered trade marks and arranges by the
referencing agreement to create and favourably display, on
the basis of those keywords, advertising links to sites offering
goods identical or similar to those covered by the trade mark
registration is using those trade marks in a manner which
their proprietor is entitled to prevent?

2. In the event that such use does not constitute a use which
may be prevented by the trade mark proprietor under the
directive or
[Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of
20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark] (2), may
the provider of the paid referencing service be regarded as
providing an information society service consisting of the
storage of
the
service, within the meaning of Article 14 of Directive
2000/31 of 8 June 2000 (3), so that that provider cannot

information provided by the recipient of

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Google France

Respondents: CNRRH, Pierre-Alexis Thonet, Bruno Raboin, Tiger,
a franchisee of ‘Unicis’

Questions referred

1. Does the reservation by an economic operator, by means of
an agreement on paid Internet referencing, of a keyword trig-
gering, in the case of a request using that word, the display
of a link proposing connection to a site operated by that
operator in order to offer for sale goods or services, and
which reproduces or imitates a trade mark registered by a
third party in order to designate identical or similar goods,
without the authorisation of the proprietor of that trade
mark, constitute in itself an infringement of the exclusive
right guaranteed to the latter by Article 5 of First Council
Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 (1)?