natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
6 Irrelevant Arguments for Assessing Likelihood of Confusion
Brezpredmetne utemeljitve za presojanje verjetnosti zmede
6.1 Specific marketing strategies
Posebne strategije trženja
The examination of the likelihood of confusion carried out by the Office is a prospective examination.
Preizkušanje verjetnosti zmede, ki ga izvede Urad, je vnaprejšnje preizkušanje.
In contrast to trade mark infringement situations - where the courts deal with specific circumstances in which the particular facts and the specific nature of use of the trade mark are crucial - the deliberations of the Office on likelihood of confusion are carried out in a more abstract manner.
V nasprotju s kršitvami blagovne znamke, pri katerih sodišča obravnavajo posebne okoliščine, v katerih so bistvena določena dejstva in posebna uporaba blagovne znamke, so presoje Urada o verjetnosti zmede težje razumljive.
For this reason, specific marketing strategies are not relevant.
Zato posebne strategije trženja niso pomembne.
The Office must take the usual circumstances in which the goods covered by the marks are marketed as its benchmark, that is, those circumstances that are expected for the category of goods covered by the marks.
Urad mora kot primerjalno merilo uporabiti običajne okoliščine, v katerih se trži blago, ki ga zajemata znamki, tj. okoliščine, ki se pričakujejo za kategorijo blaga, ki ga zajemata znamki.
The particular circumstances in which the goods covered by the marks are actually marketed have, as a matter of principle, no impact on the assessment of the likelihood of confusion because they may vary in time depending on the wishes of the proprietors of the trade marks (15/03/2007, C171/06 P, Quantum, EU:C:2007:171, § 59; 22/03/2012, C354/11 P, G, EU:C:2012:167, § 73; 21/06/2012, T276/09, Yakut, EU:T:2012:313, § 58).
Okoliščine, v katerih se blago, ki ga zajemata znamki, dejansko trži, načeloma ne vplivajo na presojo verjetnosti zmede, ker se lahko sčasoma spremenijo glede na želje imetnikov blagovnih znamk (15/03/2007, C171/06 P, Quantum, EU:C:2007:171, § 59; 22/03/2012, C354/11 P, G, EU:C:2012:167, § 73; 21/06/2012, T276/09, Yakut, EU:T:2012:313, § 58).
For example, the fact that one party offers its everyday consumer goods (wines) for sale at a higher price than competitors is a purely subjective marketing factor that is, as such, irrelevant when assessing the likelihood of confusion (14/11/2007, T101/06, Castell del Remei Oda, EU:T:2007:340, § 52).
Tako je na primer dejstvo, da ena stranka svoje blago za vsakdanjo potrošnjo (vina) prodaja po višji ceni kot konkurenti, popolnoma subjektiven dejavnik trženja, ki je kot tak nepomemben za presojanje verjetnosti zmede (14/11/2007, T101/06, Castell del Remei Oda, EU:T:2007:340, § 52).
6.2 Reputation of EUTM application
Ugled prijave blagovne znamke EU
Applicants sometimes argue that there will be no likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark because the EUTM application has a reputation.
Prijavitelji včasih trdijo, da ne bo verjetnosti zmede v povezavi s prejšnjo znamko, saj prijava blagovne znamke EU uživa ugled.
Therefore, when considering whether or not the EUTM falls under any of the relative grounds for refusal, events or facts that happened before the filing date of the EUTM are irrelevant because the opponent's rights, insofar as they predate the EUTM, are earlier than the applicant's EUTM.
Zato pri presojanju, ali je mogoče pri blagovni znamki EU upoštevati katerega od relativnih razlogov za zavrnitev, dogodki ali dejstva, ki so nastopili pred prijavo blagovne znamke EU, niso pomembni, saj so pravice vložnika ugovora, če so starejše od blagovne znamke EU, starejše od prijaviteljeve blagovne znamke EU.
Earlier signs Contested sign Case No
Prejšnji znaki Izpodbijani znak Št. zadeve
G&S: Class 5 Territory: Germany Assessment: the Board held that the differences between the signs were such as to exclude the likelihood that the contested mark would be perceived as belonging to the opponent's family of marks (assuming the existence of this had been established).
Blago in storitve: razred 5 Ozemlje: Nemčija Presoja: Odbor je menil, da razlike med znakoma izključujejo verjetnost, da bi se lahko izpodbijana znamka štela za del družine znamk, katerih imetnik je vložnik ugovora (ob predpostavki, da je bil obstoj družine ugotovljen).
When ‘ophtal' is combined with ‘Pan-',‘ Crom-' and ‘ Visc-', these partly disjointed prefixes become of greater distinctive value, affecting quite significantly the overall impression made by each of the marks as a whole, and in each case providing initial elements quite clearly different from the first half - ‘Alerg' - of the mark applied for.
Kadar se „ophtal“ uporablja v kombinaciji s „Pan-“, „Crom-“ in „Visc-“, imajo te delno ločene predpone večjo razlikovalno vrednost in precej pomembno vplivajo na splošen vtis, ki ga ima vsaka od znamk kot celota, vsekakor pa se prvi del precej jasno loči od prve polovice („Alerg“) prijavljene znamke.
The German consumer, upon seeing ‘Alergoftal' would not think of dividing it into two elements, as opposed to being invited to do so when encountering marks made up of two elements separated by a hyphen (paras 14, 18).
Če bi nemški potrošnik videl besedo „Alergoftal“, ne bi dobil vtisa, da je sestavljena iz dveh elementov, česar pa ne bi mogli trditi za primere znamk, sestavljenih iz dveh elementov, ki sta ločena z vezajem (točki 14 in 18).
G&S: Class 5 Territory: EU Assessment: the element ‘Ophtal', which denotes ophthalmologic preparations, is a weak element in the family of marks.
Blago in storitve: razred 5 Ozemlje: EU Presoja: Element „Ophtal“, ki označuje oftalmološke pripravke, je v družini znamk šibek.
The elements TIM, SIC and LAC are the distinctive elements (paras 92-93).
Elementi TIM, SIC in LAC so razlikovalni (točki 92 in 93).
UNIZINS, UNIFONDS and UNIRAK UNIWEB 16/06/2011, C317/10 P
UNIZINS, UNIFONDS in UNIRAK UNIWEB 16/06/2011, C317/10 P
G&S: Class 36 (financial services) Territory: Germany Assessment: in this judgment the Court annulled a decision of the GC since it had not duly assessed the structure of the marks to be compared, nor the influence of the position of their common element on the perception of the relevant public (para. 57).
Blago in storitve: razred 36 (finančne storitve) Ozemlje: Nemčija Presoja: Sodišče je v tej sodbi razveljavilo odločbo Splošnega sodišča, saj to ni ustrezno presodilo o zgradbi znakov, ki jih je treba primerjati, niti o vplivu položaja elementa, ki jim je skupen, na to, kako jih lahko dojema upoštevna javnost (točka 57).
Earlier signs Contested sign Case No
Prejšnji znak Izpodbijani znak Št. zadeve
G&S: Class 36 (financial services) Territory: Germany Assessment: the Board considered that the opponent had in fact submitted sufficient evidence, by submitting, in particular, references from the relevant specialist press, such as FINANZtest, and by referring to its considerable 17.6 % market share of ‘Uni' investment funds amongst German fund management companies, to show that it uses the prefix ‘UNI' for a number of well-known investment funds.
Blago in storitve: razred 36 (finančne storitve) Ozemlje: Nemčija Presoja: Odbor je menil, da je vložnik ugovora predložil zadostne dokaze, saj je predložil zlasti navedbe iz ustreznega specializiranega tiska, kot je FINANZtest, in se skliceval na tržni delež naložbenega sklada „Uni“, ki med nemškimi družbami za upravljanje skladov znaša kar 17,6 %, s čimer je dokazal, da uporablja predpono „UNI“ za več znanih naložbenih skladov.
Earlier signs Contested sign Case No
UNIFIX, BRICOFIX, MULTIFIX, CONSTRUFIX, TRABAFIX itd.
G&S: Classes 1, 17 and 19 (adhesives) Territory: Spain Assessment: the Board considered that the opponent had proven the existence of a family of marks.
Blago in storitve: razredi 1, 17 in 19 (lepila) Ozemlje: Španija Presoja: Odbor je menil, da je vložnik ugovora dokazal obstoj družine znamk.
Firstly, the Board discarded that the common element ‘FIX' would be non-distinctive, given that it is not a Spanish word and even its Spanish meaning ‘fijar' is not one that spontaneously comes to mind to average Spanish consumers in the context of glues and adhesives, since verbs like ‘pegar', ‘encolar' or ‘adherir' are used more regularly in this context.
Prvič, zavrgel je trditev, da bo skupni element „FIX“ nerazlikovalen, saj ne gre za špansko besedo in tudi njegov pomen „fijar“ v španščini ni nekaj, na kar bi povprečen španski potrošnik spontano pomislil v zvezi z lepili: v tem kontekstu se namreč pogosteje uporabljajo glagoli, kot so „pegar“, „encolar“ in „adherir“.
Secondly, the opponent duly proved that all the marks forming the family are being used.
Drugič, vložnik ugovora je ustrezno dokazal, da se uporabljajo vse znamke v družini.
Invoices and promotional literature duly show that goods bearing these marks are available to consumers on the market.
Izdani računi in promocijsko gradivo jasno kažejo, da je blago s temi znamkami na voljo potrošnikom na trgu.
Consumers, therefore, are aware that there is a family of marks.
Potrošniki so torej seznanjeni, da obstaja družina znamk.
Thirdly, ZENTRIFIX has characteristics that replicate those of the trade marks in the family.
Tretjič, ime ZENTRIFIX ima lastnosti, ki posnemajo lastnosti blagovnih znamk v družini.
The FIX element is placed at the end; the element that precedes it alludes to something that has some relevance to glues; the two elements are juxtaposed without any punctuation signs, dashes or physical separation; the typeface used for the two elements is the same (paras 43-44).
Element FIX stoji na koncu, element, ki stoji pred njim, pa se nanaša na nekaj, kar je povezano z lepili, pri čemer elementa nista ločena fizično, med njima ni niti ločil ali pomišljajev, za oba se uporablja ista pisava (točki 43 in 44).
G&S: Classes 9, 16 (potentially finance-related goods) Territory: EU Assessment: the Board considered that the evidence - consisting in particular of extracts from the opponents' websites, annual reports, press advertisements and so forth - is littered with references to the trade marks CITICORP, CITIGROUP, CITICARD, CITIGOLD, CITIEQUITY.
Blago in storitve: razreda 9 in 16 (blago, ki je lahko povezano s področjem financ) Ozemlje: EU Presoja: Odbor je menil, da dokazi (ki zajemajo predvsem izvlečke s spletnih strani, iz letnih poročil, tiskanih oglasov vložnika ugovora itd.) vsebujejo precej sklicevanj na blagovne znamke CITICORP, CITIGROUP, CITICARD, CITIGOLD in CITIEQUITY.
The evidence demonstrates that CITIBANK is in the nature of a ‘house mark' or basic brand and that the opponents have developed a whole series of sub-brands based on the CITI concept.
Dokazi kažejo, da je CITIBANK po naravi „krovna znamka“ oziroma osnovna znamka in da so vložniki ugovora razvili niz podrejenih znamk, ki temeljijo na konceptu CITI.
The contested mark CITIGATE is the sort of mark that the opponents might add to their portfolio of CITI marks, in particular if they wished to offer a new service to customers and place the emphasis on the idea of access (paras 23-24).
Izpodbijana znamka CITIGATE je takšna, da bi jo lahko vložniki ugovora dodali v svoj portfelj znamk CITI, zlasti če bi želeli strankam ponuditi novo storitev in poudariti koncept dostopa (točki 23 in 24).
G&S: Class 14 Territory: Spain Assessment: the Court did not see the relevance of Spanish case-law, according to which an average member of the Spanish public has some knowledge of English for the assessment of the particular case: In the present case, the applicant has not put forward any factual or legal consideration, deriving from the national case-law relied upon, which is capable of providing helpful guidance for determination of the case … .
Blago in storitve: razred 14 Ozemlje: Španija Presoja: Sodišče ni upoštevalo španske sodne prakse, v skladu s katero zna vsak povprečni član španske javnosti nekaj angleščine, kot pomembne za presojanje posebne zadeve: v obravnavanem primeru tožeča stranka ne navaja nobene dejanske ali pravne trditve iz nacionalne sodne prakse, na katero se sklicuje in ki bi lahko dala uporabni podatek za rešitev obravnavanega primera ...
The mere finding that certain English words are known to the Spanish consumer, namely the words ‘master', ‘easy' and ‘food', even if that is clear from the national case-law in question, cannot lead to the same conclusion as regards the word ‘often' (para. 85).
Le na podlagi ugotovitve, da španski potrošnik pozna nekatere angleške besede, kot so „master“, „easy“ in „food“ - čeprav izhaja iz zadevne nacionalne sodne prakse -, namreč ni mogoče sklepati, da pozna besedo „often“ (točka 85).
Guidelines for Examination in the Office, Part C, Opposition Page 12
Smernice za preizkušanje v Uradu, del C, Ugovor stran 1
Double Identity and Likelihood of Confusion - Global Assessment
Dvojna enakost in verjetnost zmede - Celovita presoja
DOUBLE IDENTITY AND
DVOJNA ENAKOST IN
LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION
VERJETNOST ZMEDE
GLOBAL ASSESSMENT
CELOVITA PRESOJA
1.1 Nature of global assessment 3
1.1 Narava celovite presoje 3
2 Interdependence Principle 3
2 Načelo soodvisnosti 3
3 Imperfect Recollection 4
3 Nepopoln priklic v spomin 4
4 Impact of the Method of Purchase of Goods and Services 5
4 Učinek načina kupovanja blaga in storitev 4
4.1 Visual similarity 5
4.1 Vizualna podobnost 5
4.2 Aural similarity 7
4.2 Zvočna podobnost 7
4.3 Conclusion 9
4.3 Sklepna ugotovitev 8
5 Impact of the Conceptual Similarity of the Signs on Likelihood of Confusion 9
5 Učinek pojmovne podobnosti znakov na verjetnost zmede 8
6 Impact on Likelihood of Confusion of Components that are Non-distinctive or Distinctive Only to a Low Degree 10
6 Vpliv na verjetnost zmede sestavnih delov z nerazlikovalnim učinkom ali samo šibkim razlikovalnim učinkom 10
6.1 Common components with a low degree of distinctiveness 11
6.1 Skupni sestavni deli s šibkim razlikovalnim učinkom 10
6.3 Distinctiveness of the earlier mark versus distinctiveness of the common component 15
6.3 Razlikovalni učinek prejšnje znamke proti razlikovalnemu učinku skupnega sestavnega dela 14
7 Specific cases 16
7 Posebni primeri 15
7.1 Short signs 16
7.1 Kratki znaki 15
7.2 Name/Surnames 17
7.2 Imena/priimki 16
7.2.1 Names 17
7.2.1 Imena 16
7.2.2 Business names in combination with other components 17
7.2.2 Imena podjetij v povezavi z drugimi sestavnimi deli 16
7.2.3 First and family names 18
7.2.3 Imena in priimki 17
7.3 Colour marks per se 22
7.3 Barvna znamka kot taka 21
1.1 Nature of global assessment
Narava celovite presoje
A likelihood of confusion (including a likelihood of association) exists if there is a risk that the public might believe that the goods or services in question, under the assumption that they bear the marks in question, come from the same undertaking or, as the case may be, from economically linked undertakings.
Verjetnost zmede (vključno z verjetnostjo povezovanja) obstaja, kadar obstaja tveganje, da bi javnost lahko mislila, da zadevno blago ali storitve izvirajo iz istega podjetja ali gospodarsko povezanih podjetij, na podlagi predpostavke, da so označeni z zadevnimi znamkami.
If a significant part of the relevant public of the goods or services at issue may be confused as to the origin of the goods or services, this is sufficient.
Za ugotovitev, da obstaja verjetnost zmede, je dovolj, če pomemben del upoštevne javnosti ni prepričan o izvoru zadevnega blaga ali storitev.
Therefore, there is no need to establish that all actual or potential consumers of the relevant goods or services are likely to be confused.
Zato ni treba ugotavljati, ali obstaja verjetnost zmede pri vseh dejanskih ali potencialnih potrošnikih zadevnega blaga ali storitev.
The Office normally examines the most salient and habitually relevant factors relating to likelihood of confusion and establishes their degrees:
Urad navadno prouči dejavnike, ki najbolj izstopajo in so običajno najpomembnejši pri presojanju verjetnosti zmede, ter določi njihove stopnje:
similarity of the goods and services;
podobnost blaga in storitev;
the relevant public and the level of attention;
upoštevna javnost in stopnja pozornosti;
similarity of the signs taking into account their distinctive and dominant elements;
podobnost znakov ob upoštevanju njihovih razlikovalnih in prevladujočih elementov;
the distinctiveness of the earlier mark.
razlikovalni učinek prejšnje znamke.
In the last section of a decision containing the global assessment, those factors are weighed up.
Ti dejavniki se pretehtajo v zadnjem razdelku odločbe, ki vsebuje celovito presojo.
However, the global assessment can weigh up many other factors that are relevant to deciding on likelihood of confusion (see the Guidelines, Part C, Opposition, Section 2, Double Identity and Likelihood of Confusion, Chapter 6, Other Factors).
Vendar se lahko v celoviti presoji pretehtajo številni drugi dejavniki, ki so pomembni za odločitev glede verjetnosti zmede (glej Smernice, del C: Ugovor, razdelek 2: Dvojna enakost in verjetnost zmede, poglavje 6: Drugi dejavniki).
2 Interdependence Principle
Načelo soodvisnosti
The Court has set out the essential principle that evaluating likelihood of confusion implies some interdependence between the relevant factors and, in particular, between the previously established findings on the degree of similarity between the marks and that between the goods or services.
Sodišče je določilo osnovno načelo, da se pri ugotavljanju verjetnosti zmede upošteva neka stopnja soodvisnosti med upoštevnimi dejavniki, zlasti pri prejšnjih ugotovitvah o stopnji podobnosti med znamkami ter med blagom ali storitvami.
Therefore, a lesser degree of similarity between goods and services may be offset by a greater degree of similarity between the marks and vice versa (29/09/1998, C39/97, Canon, EU:C:1998:442, § 17).
Tako lahko majhna podobnost med blagom in storitvami odtehta večjo podobnost med znamkami in obratno (29/09/1998, C39/97, Canon, EU:C:1998:442, § 17).
This principle of interdependence is crucial to the analysis of likelihood of confusion.
To načelo soodvisnosti je bistveno za analizo verjetnosti zmede.
The interdependence of those factors is expressly referred to in recital 8 in the Preamble to the EUTMR, according to which the concept of similarity is to be interpreted in relation to the likelihood of confusion, the assessment of which depends on numerous elements and, in particular, on the recognition of the mark on the market, the association that can be made with the used or registered sign, the degree of similarity between the mark and the sign and that between the goods or services identified (10/09/2008, T325/06, Capio, EU:T:2008:338, § 72 and case-law cited).
Soodvisnost med navedenimi dejavniki je izrecno navedena v uvodni izjavi 8 v preambuli Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, v skladu s katero je treba pojem podobnosti razlagati v zvezi z verjetnostjo zmede, ugotavljanje katere je odvisno od številnih elementov, zlasti od prepoznavnosti blagovne znamke na trgu, povezovanja, ki ga lahko povzroči uporabljen ali registriran znak, stopnje podobnosti med znamko in znakom ter med označenim blagom in storitvami (10/09/2008, T325/06, Capio, EU:T:2008:338, § 72 in navedena sodna praksa).
The requirement for a global assessment and the principle of interdependence means that where there is at least some degree of similarity between the signs and the relevant goods/services, there will be an assessment of likelihood of confusion involving an iterative process that weighs up all the relevant factors.
Zahteva po celoviti presoji in načelo soodvisnosti pomenita, da kadar obstaja vsaj neka stopnja podobnosti med znaki in zadevnim blagom/storitvami, se bo presojala verjetnost zmede, ki vključuje iterativni postopek, pri katerem se presoja pomen vseh upoštevnih dejavnikov.
This process takes place in the global assessment section.
Ta postopek se izvaja v okviru razdelka Celovita presoja.
In practice, this means that the Office will weigh up, inter alia, the degree of similarity between the goods and services and the degree of attention paid by the relevant public to those goods and services, the degree of similarity between the signs, and whether the impression produced by any one of the levels of comparison (visual/aural/conceptual) is more important, and the distinctiveness of the earlier mark.
V praksi to pomeni, da bo Urad med drugim pretehtal stopnjo podobnosti med blagom in storitvami ter stopnjo pozornosti, ki jo upoštevna javnost nameni navedenemu blagu in storitvam, stopnjo podobnosti med znaki, ali je pomembnejši vtis, ustvarjen na kateri koli stopnji primerjave (vizualni/zvočni/pojmovni), ter razlikovalni učinek prejšnje znamke.
The outcome depends on the particularities of each case, but as a rule of thumb it can be said that when there is an average degree of similarity between the signs and between the goods or services, the degree of attention of the relevant public is average and the earlier trade mark has a normal distinctiveness, there will be a likelihood of confusion.
Rezultat je odvisen od posebnosti vsakega primera, vendar je mogoče na splošno reči, da bo verjetnost zmede obstajala pri povprečni stopnji podobnosti med znaki ter med blagom ali storitvami, povprečni stopnji pozornosti upoštevne javnosti in običajnem razlikovalnem učinku prejšnje blagovne znamke.
However, the lower the degree of one factor, the higher the degree of other factors must be in order to find a likelihood of confusion (bearing in mind that the likelihood of confusion is inversely affected by an increased degree of attention of the relevant public).
A nižja ko je stopnja enega dejavnika, višja mora biti stopnja drugih dejavnikov, da bi ugotovili verjetnost zmede (ob upoštevanju, da na verjetnost zmede obratno sorazmerno vpliva povečana stopnja pozornosti upoštevne javnosti).
Therefore, on the basis of an average degree of distinctiveness of the earlier mark and an average degree of attentiveness of the public, the finding of a likelihood of confusion may be justified when the signs are identical or highly similar, despite a low degree of similarity between the goods and/or services.
Zato se na podlagi povprečne stopnje razlikovalnega učinka prejšnje znamke in povprečne stopnje pozornosti javnosti ugotovitev verjetnosti zmede lahko upraviči, kadar so znaki enaki ali zelo podobni, kljub nizki stopnji podobnosti med blagom in/ali storitvami.
However, such a finding is more difficult on the basis of a limited distinctiveness of the earlier mark and/or when the level of attention of the public is higher than average.
Vendar je takšna ugotovitev težja na podlagi omejenega razlikovalnega učinka prejšnje znamke in/ali kadar je stopnja pozornosti javnosti višja od povprečja.
Where the degrees of similarity of the marks are different in each aspect of comparison (visual, phonetic and conceptual), it has to be taken into account whether one aspect is more important for the public when purchasing the goods.
Kadar so stopnje podobnosti znamk drugačne pri vsakem vidiku primerjave (vizualnem, zvočnem in pojmovnem), je treba upoštevati, ali je eden od vidikov pomembnejši za javnost pri nakupu blaga.
Moreover, the factors to be taken into account and their importance in the global assessment will vary according to the particular circumstances.
Poleg tega se bodo dejavniki, ki jih je treba upoštevati, in njihov pomen pri celoviti presoji, razlikovali glede na določene okoliščine.
For example, in clear-cut cases where the goods/services and the signs are highly similar or identical, the Office may find a likelihood of confusion without assessing all factors - such as enhanced distinctiveness, family of marks, etc.
Urad lahko na primer v nedvoumnih primerih, v katerih so blago/storitve in znaki zelo podobni ali enaki, ugotovi verjetnost zmede, ne da bi proučil vse dejavnike, na primer povečan razlikovalni učinek, družina znamk itd.
Importantly, it is not possible to set out in the abstract whether one factor carries more weight than another, because these factors will have varying degrees of relative importance depending on the circumstances.
Pomembno je, da ni mogoče teoretično določiti, ali je kateri dejavnik pomembnejši od drugega, ker bo njihov pomen relativen in odvisen od okoliščin.