Source: http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/trademark-law/exhaustion-of-trade-mark-rights/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 03:54:03+00:00

Document:
The Appellate Court in Poznań in its judgmet of 28 January 2009, case file I ACa 967/08 held that after the introduction of goods bearing a trademark on the market, the right of protection is “exhausted”. This follows directly from the provisions of Article 155(1) of the Polish Act of 30 June 2000 on Industrial Property Law – IPL – (in Polish: ustawa Prawo własności przemysłowej), published in Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) of 2001 No 49, item 508, consolidated text of 13 June 2003, Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No 119, item 1117, with subsequent amendments.
1. The right of protection for a trademark shall not extend to the acts in respect of the goods bearing that trademark consisting, in particular, of offering the goods or further putting on the market the goods bearing that trademark, where the said goods have earlier been put on the market on the territory of the Republic of Poland by the right holder or with his consent.
2. The right of protection for a trademark shall neither be considered infringed by an act of importation or other acts, referred to in paragraph (1), in respect of the goods bearing the trademark, if these goods have earlier been put on the market on the territory of the European Economic Area by the right holder or with his consent.
3. Paragraphs (1) and (2) shall not apply, where there exist legitimate reasons for the right holder to oppose further commercialization of the goods, especially where the condition of the goods is changed or impaired after they have been put on the market.
This means that further market participant has the right to use the trade mark for advertising and information purposes, as long as this does not mislead as to the existence of economic links between the trade mark owner and a person who uses such sign. See also “Trade mark law, case III CK 410/03“.
The Court also ruled that the “pauperization” of a word trade mark means its adoption to the colloquial speech, which involves changing its function from being the name the unit of goods to the description of the species or genus and by enlarging its description on items that are in no way connected with the person entitled to a trade mark. This is usually the result of the existence of the brand for a long time in large areas and of its high popularity and intensive advertising. Such a phenomenon does not limit the exclusive rights of a holder of a registered trade mark and per se does not authorize other entities to use a protected trade mark in their business.
Categories: Art. 155 IPL | Art. 18 CUC | Art. 6 CC | case law | exhaustion of trade mark rights | Polish Act on Combating Unfair Competition | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Appeallate Court | Polish Civil Code | trade mark fair use | trade mark infringement | trademark law.
The Supreme Court in its judgment of 27 October 2004 case file III CK 410/03 held that the use of someone else’s trademark for informational purposes and in advertising is allowed, if it does not mislead as to the existence of economic links between the trade mark owner and the person that uses such trade mark.
Categories: Art. 155 IPL | Art. 19 CUC | Art. 19 TMA | Art. 3(1) CUC | case law | exhaustion of trade mark rights | Polish Act on Combating Unfair Competition | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Act on Trade marks | Polish Supreme Court | trade mark fair use | trade mark infringement | trademark law.

References: Art. 155
 Art. 18
 Art. 6
 Art. 155
 Art. 19
 Art. 19
 Art. 3