Source: http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/polish-institutions/
Timestamp: 2013-06-19 10:35:46
Document Index: 708094957

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 129', 'Art. 129', 'Art. 131', 'Art. 256', 'Art. 131', 'Art. 131', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 1', 'Art. 8', 'Art. 4', 'Art. 7', 'Art. 7', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 162', 'Art. 164', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 165', 'Art. 169', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 169', 'Art. 172', 'Art. 315', 'Art. 7', 'Art. 7', 'Art. 8', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 140', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 25', 'Art. 43', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 385', 'Art. 107', '§3', 'Art. 80', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 145', 'Art. 16', 'Art. 18', 'Art. 218', 'Art. 29', 'Art. 30', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 132', 'Art. 123', 'Art. 151']

Polish IP & IT law – copyright trademark computer internet telecomm » Polish institutions
Archive for: Polish institutions
Categories: 3D trade mark | Art. 129(1)(ii) IPL | Art. 129(2)(i) IPL | Art. 131(2)(i) IPL | Art. 256 IPL | non-traditional trade marks | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish courts | Polish institutions | Polish law | Polish Patent Office | trade mark invalidation | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case no. Sp. 407/12
Categories: Art. 131(1)(iii) IPL | Art. 131(2)(i) IPL | Art. 132(1)(i) IPL | geographical indications | geographical name as trade mark | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Patent Office | trade mark invalidation. Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 1376/11
January 14th, 2013, Tomasz Rychlicki
Categories: Art. 132(2)(iii) IPL | company name or firm | personal rights or interests | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish courts | Polish institutions | Polish Patent Office | trade mark invalidation | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case Sp. 472/05
Categories: Art. 1 ARNR | Art. 8(1) TMA | company name or firm | copyright law | copyrightable subject matter | personal rights or interests | Polish Act on Authors Rights and Neighbouring Rights | Polish Act on Trade marks | Polish courts | Polish District Court | Polish Patent Office | threshold of creativity | trade mark invalidation | trademark law. Trade mark law, case Sp. 500/10
On 19 November 2012, the Adjudicative Board of the Polish Patent Office held its hearing, case no. Sp. 500/10. Danone’s representative has requested the PPO to postpone the hearing to allow him to get acquaint with the pleading filed by Bakoma. The PPO acceded, and set a two-week deadline. The PPO obliged both parties to complete all claims in a period of two months, under pain of losing the chance to raise them at a later date. Bakoma also requested the Polish Patent Office to decide on the lapse of the protection for the 3D trade mark IR-700040, however the PPO did not schedule the hearing in this case, no. Sp. 513/08. Categories: 3D trade mark | acquired distinctiveness | appearance of the whole or a part of a product | Art. 4 TMA | Art. 7(1) TMA | Art. 7(2) TMA | Directive 89/104/EEC | EU law | industrial designs | Judgments of Court of Justice of the EC | non-traditional trade marks | Polish Act on Trade marks | Polish institutions | Polish Patent Office | trade mark invalidation | trade mark lapse | trademark law. Trade mark law, case Sp. 566/09
December 6th, 2012, Tomasz Rychlicki
On 11 January 2008, the Polish Patent Office granted the right of protection for the word-figurative trade mark SEYDAK R-199882 for goods in Class 4 such as fuel, lubricants, engine and gear oils and hydraulic oils, and services in Class 39 such as parking services, and in Class 43 such as hotel services: motels and restaurants. This sign was applied for by the Polish entrepreneur Przedsiębiorstwo Usługowo Handlowe Marian Seydak.
BP p.l.c. filed a request for the invalidation of the SEYDAK trade mark. The British company argued that the questioned sign uses a composition of colors (green and yellow) that are presented in the reputed trade marks owned by BP. The Company referred to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of 3 September 2009 case C-498/07 and the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 20 February 2007 case file II GSK 247/06, judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 12 October 2010 case file II GSK 849/09, and the judgment of the Supreme Court of 23 October 2008 case file V CK 109/08. See “Trade mark law, case II GSK 247/06“, “Trade mark law, case II GSK 849/09” and “Trade mark law, case V CSK 109/08“. BP claimed that it is not possible to assume that in the case of word-figurative trade mark, the verbal elements always dominate. The above cited judgments have changed this principle, and provided that sometimes colors or images are the dominant elements that may raise associations between compared trade marks. A patent attorney who was representing Marian Seydak, pointed to the discrepancy of the case-law, and stressed that the mere similarity of background is not significant enough when compared to the visual aspect of both signs. Marian Seydak argued that the trade mark at issue is different in terms of visual aspect, colors, and the layout of letters. He also provided that he is a local entrepreneur, who has just five gas stations distant from the main routes.
The Adjudicative Board of the PPO in its decision of 12 November 2012 case no. Sp. 566/09 dismissed the request. The decision is not final yet. The complaint may be filed before the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw.
Categories: Art. 132(2)(iii) IPL | double color | EU law | Judgments of Court of Justice of the EC | non-traditional trade marks | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Patent Office | single colour | trade mark invalidation | trade mark opposition | trademark law. Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 122/12
Categories: Art. 162 IPL | Art. 164 IPL | legal interest | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Patent Office | trade mark invalidation | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 1716/11
Categories: Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL | Art. 165 IPL | Art. 169(1)(i) IPL | bad faith | legal interest | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish courts | Polish institutions | Polish law | Polish Patent Office | trade mark invalidation | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case Sp. 484/10
November 9th, 2012, Tomasz Rychlicki
Nike International Ltd., filed a notice of opposition to the decision of the Polish Patent Office on the grant of the right of protection for the figurative trade mark R-215109 that was registered for Sinda Poland Corporation sp. z o. o. for goods in Class 25 such as shoes. Nike claimed similarity of its signs and the unfair use of reputation. The Adjudicative Board of the Polish Patent Office in its decision of 26 October 2012 case no. Sp. 484/10 dismissed the opposition. The PPO did not find similarity between the opposed trade marks, and ruled that the disputed signs brings to mind an arrowhead. The decision is not final yet.
Categories: Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL | Art. 132(2)(iii) IPL | famous trade marks | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Patent Office | reputed trade marks | similarity of signs | trade mark opposition. Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 769/12
Categories: Act on the Polish language | Art. 169(1)(iv) IPL | Art. 172 IPL | genuine use | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish law | Polish Patent Office | trade mark lapse | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case II GSK 1563/11
Categories: Art. 315 IPL | Art. 7(1) TMA | Art. 7(2) TMA | Art. 8(3) TMA | EU law | geographical indications | Judgments of Court of Justice of the EC | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Act on Trade marks | Polish courts | Polish institutions | Polish Patent Office | Polish Supreme Administrative Court | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case no. Sp. 30/11
On 27 February 2009, the Polish Patent Office granted the right of protection for the word trade mark PARADA R-215899 applied for the goods in Class 18 such as leather and imitations of leather, and goods made of these materials and goods in Class 25 such as clothing made of natural and synthetic materials, leather garments, footwear, headgear, by the Polish company HenMar sp. z o. o. from Dębica. PRADA S.A. from Luxembourg filed a notice of opposition. The company argued that the trade mark PARADA is confusingly similar to its word-figurative trade mark PRADA IR-650695 registered in Poland with the earlier priority of 1995, for goods in Class 18 and Class 25. The Adjudicative Board of the Polish Patent Office in its decision of 12 October 2012 case no. Sp. 30/11 ruled that PARADA and PRADA are not similar. In the opinion of the PPO, although compared signs are composed of similar letters, however, the deciding factor was the conceptual aspect of both trade marks. In Polish, the word “parada” has a specific meaning and means, among others, spectacular show with the participation of many people (parade). The PPO decided that the semantic aspect proves that both signs will be perceived differently and there is no risk of misleading the public as to the origin of goods. Further allegations, based on the reputation of PRADA trade mark, have become, therefore, irrelevant. The decision is not final yet. The complaint may be filed before the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw.
Categories: Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL | Art. 132(2)(iii) IPL | company name or firm | personal rights or interests | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish law | Polish Patent Office | reputed trade marks | similarity of goods | similarity of signs | trade mark opposition | trademark law. Trade mark law, case II GSK 2324/11
The Supreme Administrative Court in its judgment of 10 July 2012 case file II GSK 2324/11 repealed the contested judgment and returned it to the VAC for further reconsideration. The Court held that the important drawback of the contested judgment and the decision of the PPO was the assumption on the similarity of the opposed trade marks that was based on the mere fact of the use in their visual aspect, a form of tree, without trying to examine whether the different presentation, including the type and shape of the tree, used in these signs, allowed for the adoption of the view that there exists the similarity of the signs. As a result, the Polish Patent Office, followed by the VAC, accepted the monopoly (exclusiveness) of the company to use very idea of the tree element in its trade mark. The SAC recommended that the VAC should also take a stand on the consequences of the fact that S&S Smiczek & Smiczek Hanna Smiczek used its trade mark for a considerable period of time from 2002. After almost 5 years, Julius Sämann Ltd. initiated a civil action against the S&A. The civil proceedings with regard to trade mark infringement ended before the Supreme Court in its judgment of 14 October 2009 case file V CSK 102/09. The Supreme Court dismissing a cassation appeal filed by Julius Sämann Ltd., based on the argument that long-standing and undisturbed use of the sign in question, in connection with the principle venire contra factum proprium, according to which, if the party continued at a specific practice, it can not rely on its illegality, if other entity accepted such practice in good faith and it could suffer injury as a result of the changes. The application of this rule would come into play especially in a situation, if after the reexamination of evidence, the similarity of opposed signs has been established, and there was not any proof of bad faith on S&S side. The argument that there was bad faith requires evidence and proof, because good faith is presumed. Whether, in connection with long-term use, the S&S trade mark has acquired distinctiveness under average conditions of the market, a feature which is required for any sign to be registered, could speak in favor of the principle of venire contra factum proprium. In addition, marking the goods produced by S&S with its own trade mark, which are the goods of the same kind as products of Julius Sämann Ltd., undoubtedly positively affected the overall demand for such goods on the marker. Therefore, the invalidation of S&S trade mark in situation of its use in good faith, could easily lead to the acquisition of the customers of S&S by Julius Sämann Ltd., without incurring the costs which were attended by S&S in the promotion of the sign, The Court found it difficult to accept. The SAC also held that it should be borne in mind that the right of protection for a trade mark, as every object in the closed list (numerus clasus) of property rights, is admittedly an absolute personal right effective against all (erga omnes), however, this right is not subject to absolute protection. In the light of the general principles for the exercise of property rights as defined in the Polish Civil Code, the boundaries of this right are defined in the Acts and the rules of social coexistence. The Polish Industrial Property Law also refers to these rules. For these reasons, the circumstances giving rise to the allegation of the infringement of the principle of venire contra factum proprium, are one of the limits to the exercise by the owner of its legitimate socio-economic use of the right of protection that derives from the registration of the trade mark. Thus, the invalidation proceedings started against the trade mark Forest Fresh R-183901, in violation of the above mentioned principle, may be considered as the abuse of the right of protection for a trade mark by the proprietor of such a right, that is not entitled to the protection.
Categories: 3D trade mark | acquired distinctiveness | Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL | Art. 132(2)(iii) IPL | Art. 140 CC | bad faith | distinctive character | exhaustion of trade mark rights | famous trade marks | likelihood of confusion | non-traditional trade marks | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Civil Code | Polish law | Polish Patent Office | Polish Supreme Administrative Court | Polish Supreme Court | product packaging | reputed trade marks | similarity of goods | similarity of signs | trade mark infringement | trade mark invalidation | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 1267/11
Categories: Art. 132(1)(ii) IPL | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Patent Office | similarity of services | similarity of signs | trade mark refusal | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case Sp. 202/12
Apple, Inc. filed the request for invalidation of the right of protection for the word-figurative trade mark A.PL registered for goods and services in Class 9, 35 and 42 and owned by the Polish company Internet S.A. from Warszawa. The Polish company also provides an online grocery store under the domain name a.pl. The main arguments presented by the U.S. company were based on confusing similarity between the sign A.PL and national and Community trade marks that are owned by Apple. Arguments based on the unfair use of the reputation were also raised.
The Adjudicative Board held the first hearing on 29 august 2012 case no. Sp. 202/12. However, due to the large volume of evidence supplied by Apple, the hearing was adjourned.
Categories: Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL | Art. 132(2)(iii) IPL | computer law | domain names | Internet domains law | legal regulations on computer networks | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Patent Office | Polish TLDs | similarity of goods | similarity of services | similarity of signs | trade mark invalidation | trademark law. Personal data protection, case I OSK 1827/11
Categories: Art. 25 PPD | computer law | Directive 2003/98/EC | Directive 95/46/EC | e-access | e-documents | e-law issues | e-services | EU law | Inspector General for Personal Data Protection | personal data | personal rights or interests | Polish Act on Protection of Personal Data | Polish Supreme Administrative Court | privacy | surname. Tax law, case I FSK1644/11
August 27th, 2012, Tomasz Rychlicki
A taxpayer who sold the old porcelain and books which were inherited from grandparents and parents, and bought on the antique fairs, was ordered by the Polish tax authorities to pay VAT for four years. Every year the taxpayer sold hundreds of these things, for more than three thousand PLN. Only 3089 PLN is the amount of income received during the year that is deemed as free of tax,. According to tax authorities this activity could not be regarded as a hobby, but as a professional activity, that should be taxed.
The Supreme Administrative Court in its judgment of 9 August 2012 case file I FSK 1644/11 dismissed the complaint of the taxpayer.
Categories: Art. 43 GSTA | Art. 5 GSTA | computer law | e-auctions | e-law issues | legal regulations on computer networks | Polish Act on Goods and Services Tax | Polish Supreme Administrative Court | Tax Chamber | tax law | Tax Office | VAT. Consumer protection, case XVII Amc 5817/11
August 26th, 2012, Tomasz Rychlicki
The Polish Court of Competition and Consumer Protection in its judgment of 31 May 2012 case file XVII Amc 5817/11 held that an entrepreneur cannot include in its terms of telecommunication services any regulations and provisions which would release it from the liability for any loss due to lack of customer access to the service provided. Activities that intend to misinformation, confusion, misconception or are directed to exploit ignorance or naivety of the customers and consumers, are contrary to good customs.
Categories: Art. 385¹ CC | computer law | consumer protection law | e-law issues | ISP liability | legal regulations on computer networks | Polish Civil Code | Polish Court of Competition and Consumer Protection | Polish courts | Polish institutions | President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection | telecommunication law. Procedural law, case VI SA/Wa 377/12
Categories: Art. 107 §3 APC | Art. 80 APC | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Administrative Proceedings Code | Polish Patent Office | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 137/12
Categories: Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL | Art. 132(2)(iii) IPL | double color | non-traditional trade marks | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Patent Office | reputed trade marks | similarity of goods | similarity of services | similarity of signs | single colour | trade mark invalidation | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Collective interests of consumers, case RPZ 11/2012
The President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection in its decision of 20 June 2012 no. RPZ 11/2012 ruled that the Polish company Creative Team S.A. infringed on collective interests of consumers, by posting in newspaper advertisements that concerned a dedicated interactive game for mobile phones entitled “Tank War”, of information suggesting a possible free use of that game, while free was just sending a text message to a specified number in order to download this application, and using it in a specific mode. The President decided that such actions were inconsistent with the provisions of the Polish Act of 16 February 2007 on Protection of Competition and Consumers – APCC – (in Polish: Ustawa o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów), published in Journal of Laws (Dziennik Ustaw) No. 50, item 331, with subsequent amendments.
Creative Team S.A. filed an appeal complaint before the Polish Court of Competition and Consumer Protection.
Categories: e-law issues | Polish Act on Protection of Competition and Consumers | Polish Court of Competition and Consumer Protection | Polish law | President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection. Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 2458/11
Categories: Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL | Art. 132(2)(iii) IPL | Art. 6bis Paris Convention | company name or firm | famous trade marks | International law | Paris Convention | personal rights or interests | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Patent Office | reputed trade marks | similarity of signs | trade mark invalidation | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court | well known trade marks. Personal data protection, case II SA/Wa 2821/11
July 26th, 2012, Tomasz Rychlicki
The Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw in its judgment of 8 March 2012 II SA/Wa 2821/11 repealed the contested decision, and held that according to the provisions of Article 18(6) of the PSEM, the only one empowered to obtain data collected by the service provider within the meaning of that Act, are the State bodies. The PSEM does not contain any other provision, which serve as the basis for disclosure of data to the entities other than state authorities. The court stated that if the legislature’s intention was to give permission to obtain operational data to entities other than state authorities, it would have included a clear regulation providing for such permission in the PSEM. Data protection is a general rule. The service provider may process personal and operational data only in the extent and on terms defined in the PSEM. Only in the absence of regulations provided in the PSEM such processing may be based on an appropriate application of the PPD. The disclosure of data to third parties – such as Promedica Care – is breaking of that protection and as an exception to the rule cannot be interpreted broadly.
Categories: Art. 145 PBAC | Art. 16 PSEM | Art. 18 PSEM | Art. 218 CRPC | Art. 29 PPD | Art. 30 PPD | computer law | criminal law | defamation | Directive 2002/58/EC | Directive 2006/24/EC | e-law issues | EU law | Inspector General for Personal Data Protection | ISP liability | legal regulations on computer networks | personal data | Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts | Polish Act on Protection of Personal Data | Polish Act on Providing Services by Electronic Means | Polish Act on Telecommunications Law | Polish Criminal Proceedings Code | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 301/12
Categories: Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL | Art. 132(2)(iii) IPL | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Patent Office | similarity of goods | similarity of signs | trade mark opposition | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 1269/11
Categories: Art. 123 IPL | Art. 151 PBAC | company name or firm | distinctive character | personal rights or interests | Polish Act on Industrial Property Law | Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts | Polish Patent Office | trade mark refusal | trademark law | Voivodeship Administrative Court. « Previous posts