natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
For instance, the degree of visual similarity may weigh more heavily in connection with goods that are usually examined visually, whilst the degree of aural similarity may be more relevant to goods normally ordered orally (see paragraph 4 below).
Stopnja vizualne podobnosti je lahko na primer pomembnejša v povezavi z blagom, ki ga navadno zaznavamo vizualno, zvočna podobnost pa je lahko pomembnejša pri blagu, ki se naroča ustno (glej odstavek 4 v nadaljevanju).
3 Imperfect Recollection
Nepopoln priklic v spomin
Although the average consumer of the category of products concerned is deemed to be reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, account is taken of the fact that the average consumer only rarely has the chance to make a direct comparison between the different marks and must place trust in the imperfect picture of them that he or she has kept in mind.
Čeprav se šteje, da je povprečni potrošnik razreda zadevnih proizvodov razmeroma dobro obveščen ter razumno pozoren in preudaren, je treba upoštevati, da lahko redko neposredno primerja različne znamke in da se mora zanesti na nepopolno podobo znamk, ki si jih je zapomnil.
It should also be borne in mind that the average consumer's level of attention is likely to vary according to the category of goods or services in question (22/06/1999, C342/97, Lloyd Schuhfabrik, EU:C:1999:323, § 26).
Poleg tega je treba upoštevati, da se lahko stopnja pozornosti povprečnega potrošnika spreminja glede na razred zadevnega blaga ali storitev (22/06/1999, C342/97, Lloyd Schuhfabrik, EU:C:1999:323, § 26).
Even consumers with a high level of attention need to rely on their imperfect recollection of trade marks (21/11/2013, T443/12, ancotel, EU:T:2013:605, § 54).
Celo potrošniki z visoko stopnjo pozornosti se morajo zanesti na svoj nepopoln priklic v spomin na blagovne znamke (21/11/2013, T443/12, ancotel, EU:T:2013:605, § 54).
4 Impact of the Method of Purchase of Goods and Services
Učinek načina kupovanja blaga in storitev
The Court has stated that, when evaluating the importance attached to the degree of visual, aural and conceptual similarity between the signs, it is appropriate to take into account the category of goods or services in question and the way they are marketed (22/09/1999, C342/97, Lloyd Schuhfabrik, EU:C:1999:323, § 27).
Sodišče je navedlo, da je treba pri oceni, kako pomembna je stopnja vizualne, zvočne in pomenske podobnosti med znaki, upoštevati razred zadevnega blaga ali storitev in način njihovega trženja (22/09/1999, C342/97, Lloyd Schuhfabrik, EU:C:1999:323, § 27).
The category of goods and services involved may increase the importance of one of the different aspects of similarity between signs (visual, phonetic and conceptual) because of how goods and services are ordered and/or purchased.
Zaradi razreda vključenega blaga in storitev se lahko poveča pomen enega od različnih vidikov podobnosti med znaki (vizualnega, zvočnega in pojmovnega) zaradi načina naročanja blaga in storitev in/ali kupovanja.
An aural or conceptual comparison between signs may be less important in the case of goods and services that are usually examined visually or may be tried on before being bought.
Zvočna ali pojmovna primerjava med znaki je lahko manj pomembna pri blagu in storitvah, ki jih navadno vizualno zaznavamo ali jih pred nakupom lahko pomerimo.
In such cases, the visual impression of signs counts more in the assessment of likelihood of confusion.
V takšnih primerih je pri presoji verjetnosti zmede pomembnejši vizualni vtis znakov.
However, it is important to emphasise that, as with all of the factors that are relevant to likelihood of confusion, the factors are interlinked and each set of circumstances must be examined on a case-by-case basis.
Treba pa je poudariti, da so tudi ti dejavniki, tako kot drugi upoštevni dejavniki za verjetnost zmede, medsebojno povezani in je treba vsak sklop okoliščin proučiti za vsak primer posebej.
This means that no general rule should be applied to broad categories of goods or services.
To pomeni, da se za širše kategorije blaga ali storitev ne uporablja nobeno splošno pravilo.
4.1 Visual similarity
Vizualna podobnost
A good example of where visual similarity can play a greater - but not an exclusive - role in the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion is clothing.
Dober primer, pri katerem ima lahko vizualna podobnost večjo, vendar ne izključno vlogo pri celoviti presoji verjetnosti zmede so oblačila.
Generally, in clothing shops, customers can either choose the clothes they wish to buy themselves or be assisted by the sales staff.
Na splošno si v trgovinah z oblačili stranke lahko same izberejo oblačila, ki jih želijo kupiti, ali jim pomagajo prodajalci.
Whilst oral communication in respect of the product and the trade mark is not excluded, the choice of the item of clothing is generally made visually.
Čeprav ustna komunikacija o izdelku in blagovni znamki ni izključena, se oblačila navadno izbirajo vizualno.
Therefore, visual perception of the marks in question will generally take place prior to purchase.
Tako bo pred nakupom na splošno značilno vizualno zaznavanje zadevnih znamk.
Accordingly, the visual aspect plays a greater role in the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion (14/10/2003, T292/01, Bass, EU:T:2003:264, § 55; 06/10/2004, T117/03-T119/03 & T171/03, NL, EU:T:2004:293, § 50; 18/05/2011, T502/07, McKenzie, EU:T:2011:223, § 50; 24/01/2012, T593/10, B, EU:T:2012:25, § 47).
V skladu s tem ima vizualni vidik večjo vlogo v celoviti presoji verjetnosti zmede (14/10/2003, T292/01, Bass, EU:T:2003:264, § 55; 06/10/2004, T117/03-T119/03 in T171/03, NL, EU:T:2004:293, § 50; 18/05/2011, T502/07, McKenzie, EU:T:2011:223, § 50; 24/01/2012, T593/10, B, EU:T:2012:25, § 47).
These considerations played a role in finding no likelihood of confusion between the marks below for, inter alia, certain goods in Class 25.
Ti premisleki so bili pomembni pri odločitvi, da pri spodnjih znamkah za nekatero blago iz razreda 25 ni verjetnosti zmede.
The same considerations were central to a finding of likelihood of confusion in the following cases also for, inter alia, certain goods in Class 25.
Isti premisleki so bili bistvenega pomena za ugotovitev verjetnosti zmede v naslednjih primerih in med drugim tudi za nekatere vrste blaga iz razreda 25.
However, granting preferential consideration to the visual perception does not mean that identical verbal elements can be overlooked due to the presence of striking figurative elements, as can be seen in the case below, where likelihood of confusion was found for goods in Class 25.
Vendar prednostno upoštevanje vizualnega zaznavanja ne pomeni, da je mogoče zaradi vpadljivih figurativnih elementov prezreti enake besedne elemente, kot je prikazano v primerih v nadaljevanju, v katerih je bila ugotovljena verjetnost zmede za blago iz razreda 25.
In a similar way, the visual impression for marks covering video games has also been held to be particularly relevant because these goods are normally purchased after a comprehensive examination of their respective specifications and technical characteristics, firstly upon the basis of information that appears in specialist catalogues or on the internet, and then at the point of sale.
Podobno je bilo ugotovljeno, da je vizualni vtis zlasti pomemben pri znamkah, ki zajemajo video igre, ker se to blago navadno kupi po izčrpnem pregledu ustreznih specifikacij in tehničnih značilnosti, najprej na podlagi informacij v strokovnih katalogih ali na spletu in nato na prodajnih mestih.
For these reasons, the visual differences were key to the finding of no likelihood of confusion below (08/09/2011, T525/09, Metronia, EU:T:2011:437, § 38-47).
Zato so bile vizualne razlike ključne za ugotovitev, da pri blagovnih znamkah v nadaljevanju ni verjetnosti zmede (08/09/2011, T525/09, Metronia, EU:T:2011:437, § 38-47).
The visual similarity between signs may also have an increased importance where the goods are ordinary consumer products (e.g. goods in Classes 29 and 30) that are most commonly purchased in supermarkets or establishments where goods are arranged on shelves and where consumers are guided more by the visual impact of the mark they are looking for.
Vizualna podobnost med znaki je lahko pomembnejša pri običajnih potrošniških proizvodih (na primer pri blagu iz razredov 29 in 30), ki se najpogosteje kupuje v samopostrežnih veleblagovnicah ali prodajalnah, v katerih je blago zloženo na police in kjer potrošnike usmerja bolj vizualni učinek znamke, ki jo iščejo.
Consequently, for such goods the visual differences were central to a finding of no likelihood of confusion in the United Kingdom between the marks below.
Zato so bile za takšno blago vizualne razlike ključne za ugotovitev, da v Združenem kraljestvu med znamkami v nadaljevanju ni verjetnosti zmede:
However, the broad principle above does not mean that for goods that are normally purchased visually, the phonetic impression can be overlooked.
Vendar zgornje splošno načelo ne pomeni, da se lahko pri blagu, ki se navadno kupuje vizualno, prezre zvočni vtis.
This latter point was highlighted in a case involving the marks below where the General Court, confirming the finding of a likelihood of confusion, held that although computers and computer accessories are sold to consumers ‘as seen' on shelves in self-service areas, the phonetic identity between the marks at issue was, in this case, at least as important as their visual similarity because an oral discussion of the characteristics of the goods and their mark is also likely to take place at the time of purchase.
To je bilo poudarjeno v zadevi, ki je vključevala znamki v nadaljevanju in v kateri je Splošno sodišče, ki je potrdilo ugotovitev verjetnosti zmede, razsodilo, da se računalniki in računalniški pripomočki potrošnikom prodajajo na policah samopostrežnih trgovin, „kot jih vidijo“, zvočna enakost med zadevnima znamkama v tej zadevi pa je bila vsaj tako pomembna kot njuna vizualna enakost, saj je verjetno, da so se ob nakupu pogovarjali o značilnostih blaga in njegovi znamki.
Furthermore, those goods could be advertised orally, on radio or by other consumers.
Poleg tega se lahko navedeno blago oglašuje ustno, po radiu ali o njem govorijo drugi potrošniki.
4.2 Aural similarity
Zvočna podobnost
In contrast to the cases above, where visual similarity played a stronger role, similarity on the phonetic level may have more weight than similarity on the visual level when the goods at issue are traditionally ordered orally.
V nasprotju z zgornjimi primeri, pri katerih je bila pomembnejša vizualna podobnost, je lahko zvočna podobnost pomembnejša od vizualne podobnosti, če se zadevno blago navadno naroča ustno.
This consideration came into play in the finding of likelihood of confusion in the case below, which dealt with vehicle rental and associated services, which are recommended and chosen orally in a significant number of cases.
Ta vidik je imel vlogo pri ugotovitvi verjetnosti zmede v zadevi v nadaljevanju, ki je obravnavala najem vozil in povezane storitve, ki se v velikem številu primerov priporočijo in izberejo ustno.
Where goods are ordered orally, the phonetic perception of the sign may also be influenced by factors such as the likely presence of various other sounds perceived by the recipient of the order at the same time.
Kadar se blago naroča ustno, lahko na zvočno zaznavanje znaka vplivajo tudi drugi dejavniki, kot so razni drugi zvoki, ki jih obenem zaznava prevzemnik naročila.
Such considerations are relevant where the goods in question are normally ordered at sales points with an increased noise factor, such as bars or nightclubs.
Takšni razmisleki so pomembni, kadar se zadevno blago navadno naroča na hrupnejših prodajnih mestih, kot so bari ali nočni klubi.
In such cases, attaching particular importance to the phonetic similarity between the signs at issue may be appropriate.
V teh primerih bi bilo primerno nameniti posebno pozornost zvočni podobnosti med zadevnima znakoma.
These considerations came into play in the finding of likelihood of confusion between the marks below for certain goods in Class 33 (15/01/2003, T99/01, Mystery, EU:T:2003:7, § 48).
Ti razmisleki so se pojavili pri ugotovitvi o verjetnosti zmede med znamkama v nadaljevanju za posamezno blago iz razreda 33 (15/01/2003, T99/01, Mystery, EU:T:2003:7, § 48).
Similarly, a particular method or customary way of ordering goods may mean increased importance being attributed to the phonetic similarity between the signs.
Podobno bi lahko posebni ali običajni način naročanja blaga pomenil, da se pripisuje večji pomen zvočni podobnosti med znaki.
For instance, the General Court has held that in the wines sector, consumers usually describe and recognise wine by reference to the verbal element that identifies it, in particular in bars and restaurants, in which wines are ordered orally after their names have been seen on the wine list (23/11/2010, T35/08, Artesa Napa Valley, EU:T:2010:476, § 62; 13/07/2005, T40/03, Julián Murúa Entrena, EU:T:2005:285, § 56; 12/03/2008, T332/04, Coto d'Arcis, EU:T:2008:69, § 38).
Splošno sodišče je na primer razsodilo, da so v vinskem sektorju potrošniki navajeni določiti in prepoznati vino glede na besedni element, ki ga označuje, zlasti v barih ali restavracijah, kjer se vino naroča ustno, potem ko so videli ime na vinski karti (23/11/2010, T35/08, Artesa Napa Valley, EU:T:2010:476, § 62; 13/07/2005, T40/03, Julián Murúa Entrena, EU:T:2005:285, § 56; 12/03/2008, T332/04, Coto d'Arcis, EU:T:2008:69, § 38).
Accordingly, in such cases, it may be appropriate to attach particular importance to the phonetic similarity between the signs at issue.
Zato bi bilo v takšnih primerih primerno posebno pozornost nameniti zvočni podobnosti med zadevnimi znaki.
These considerations came into play in the finding of likelihood of confusion between the marks below for wine despite their considerable visual differences.
Ti razmisleki so se pojavili pri ugotovitvi verjetnosti zmede med vinskimi znamkami v nadaljevanju kljub velikim vizualnim razlikam med njimi.
Nevertheless, the broad principle above does not mean that the visual impression can be overlooked for goods normally purchased orally.
Vendar zgornje splošno načelo ne pomeni, da se lahko pri blagu, ki se navadno kupuje ustno, prezre vizualni vtis.
Indeed, the General Court has held that although preponderant importance had sometimes been accorded to the phonetic perception of marks for beverages, the phonetic dissimilarities of the marks did not merit particular importance where the specific beverages were widely distributed and sold not only in specialist shops, where they would be ordered orally, but also in large shopping centres, where they would be purchased visually (03/09/2010, T472/08, 61 a nossa alegria, EU:T:2010:347, § 106).
Splošno sodišče je dejansko razsodilo, da se je zvočni zaznavi znamk pijač včasih sicer pripisoval odločilen pomen, a se zvočnim razlikam znamk ni pripisoval poseben pomen, če so se posebne pijače dobavljale vsem in se prodajale tako v specializiranih prodajalnah, kjer so se naročale ustno, kot na velikih nakupovalnih površinah, kjer naj bi se kupovale vizualno (03/09/2010, T472/08, 61 a nossa alegria, EU:T:2010:347, § 106).
4.3 Conclusion
Sklepna ugotovitev
The circumstances set out above demonstrate that in certain situations the Office should grant preferential consideration to the visual or aural perception of marks depending on how the goods and services at issue are ordered or purchased.
Zgoraj navedene okoliščine kažejo, da bi moral Urad v nekaterih primerih prednostno upoštevati vizualno ali zvočno zaznavanje znamk glede na način, kako se zadevno blago in storitve naročajo ali kupujejo.
However, identical or highly similar visual or aural elements cannot be entirely overlooked even in these situations because all the relevant factors are interlinked and interdependent, and each set of circumstances must be examined on a case-by-case basis.
Vendar tudi v teh primerih ni mogoče popolnoma prezreti enakih ali zelo podobnih vizualnih ali zvočnih elementov, saj so vsi upoštevni dejavniki medsebojno povezani in soodvisni ter je treba vsak sklop okoliščin proučiti za vsak primer posebej.
5 Impact of the Conceptual Similarity of the Signs on Likelihood of Confusion
Učinek pojmovne podobnosti znakov na verjetnost zmede
A conceptual similarity between signs with analogous semantic content may give rise to a likelihood of confusion where the earlier mark is particularly distinctive (11/11/1997, C251/95, Sabèl, EU:C:1997:528, § 24, where the signs shared the broader concept of a ‘bounding feline', but did not evoke the same animal: a puma in the earlier mark and a cheetah in the contested mark).
Pojmovna podobnost med znaki s podobno semantično vsebino lahko privede do verjetnosti zmede, če ima prejšnja znamka poseben razlikovalni učinek (11/11/1997, C251/95, Sabèl, EU:C:1997:528, § 24, kjer je bil znakoma skupen širši pojem „mačke v skoku“, ki pa ni priklical iste živali: puma v prejšnji znamki in gepard v izpodbijani znamki).
However, exceptionally, where the signs have the same distinctive concept in common accompanied by visual similarities between the signs, this may lead to a likelihood of confusion even in the absence of a particularly high distinctiveness of the earlier mark, as illustrated by the following example.
Izjemoma pa, kadar je znakom skupen isti razlikovalen pojem, ki ga spremljajo vizualne podobnosti med znaki, lahko to privede do verjetnosti zmede tudi, kadar ni posebej velikega razlikovalnega učinka prejšnje znamke, kot ponazarja naslednji primer.
A conceptual similarity between the signs may not be sufficient to outweigh the visual and phonetic differences where the concept in common is non-distinctive.
Pojmovna podobnost med znaki morda ne zadostuje, da bi prevladala nad vizualnimi in zvočnimi razlikami, kadar skupni pojem ni razlikovalen.
According to case-law, the conceptual differences between signs may counteract their visual and phonetic similarity (12/01/2006, C361/04, Picaro, EU:C:2006:25, § 20).
V skladu s sodno prakso lahko pojmovne razlike med znaki prevladajo nad vizualnimi in zvočnimi podobnostmi (12/01/2006, C361/04, Picaro, EU:C:2006:25, § 20).
According to Office practice, when a similarity is found in one aspect (visual/phonetic/conceptual), the examination of likelihood of confusion must continue .
V skladu s prakso Urada se mora preizkušanje verjetnosti zmede nadaljevati, kadar se ugotovi podobnost pri enem vidiku (vizualnem/zvočnem/pojmovnem).
Therefore, the question whether the conceptual dissimilarity is sufficient to counteract the visual and/or phonetic similarity between the marks has to be examined in the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion.
Zato je treba v celoviti presoji verjetnosti zmede proučiti vprašanje, ali pojmovna različnost zadostuje za prevlado nad vizualno in/ali zvočno podobnostjo znamk.
Furthermore, as explained above in the Guidelines, Part C, Opposition, Section 2, Double Identity and Likelihood of Confusion, Chapter 4, Comparison of Signs', paragraph 3.4.4, conceptual dissimilarity can be found only if each trade mark has a clear concept that may be immediately grasped by the public and these concepts are different.
Kot je pojasnjeno zgoraj v Smernicah, del C: Ugovor, Razdelek 2: Dvojna enakost in verjetnost zmede, poglavje 4: Primerjava znakov, odstavek 3.4.4, je mogoče poleg tega pojmovno različnost ugotoviti samo, če ima vsaka blagovna znamka jasen pomen, ki ga javnost lahko takoj dojame, in če so ti pomeni različni.
[2: See the Guidelines, Part C, Opposition, Section 2, Double Identity and Likelihood of Confusion, Chapter 4, Comparison of Signs, paragraph 1.3.]
[2: Glej Smernice, del C: Ugovor, razdelek 2: Dvojna enakost in verjetnost zmede, poglavje 4: Primerjava znakov, odstavek 1.3.]
The conceptual difference between the signs may not be sufficient to neutralise the visual and phonetic similarities.
Pojmovna razlika med znaki morda ne bo zadostovala za nevtralizacijo vizualnih in zvočnih podobnosti.
The finding of conceptual similarity must therefore be followed by a careful assessment of the inherent and acquired distinctiveness of the earlier trade mark.
Ugotovitvi pojmovne podobnosti mora zato slediti skrbna presoja svojstvenega in z uporabo pridobljenega razlikovalnega učinka prejšnje blagovne znamke.
6 Impact on Likelihood of Confusion of Components that are Non-Distinctive or Distinctive Only to a Low Degree
Vpliv na verjetnost zmede sestavnih delov z nerazlikovalnim učinkom ali samo šibkim razlikovalnim učinkom
When assessing the similarity of the signs, an analysis of whether the coinciding components are descriptive, allusive or otherwise weak is carried out in order to calculate the extent to which these coinciding components have a lesser or greater capacity to indicate commercial origin.
Pri presoji podobnosti znakov se analiza, s katero se preveri, ali so sestavni deli, ki so enaki, opisni, namigovalni ali drugače šibki, izvede zato, da se lahko določi, v kakšnem obsegu imajo ti sestavni deli, ki so enaki, manjšo ali večjo sposobnost označevanja trgovskega izvora.
It may be more difficult to establish that the public may be confused as to origin due to similarities that solely pertain to non-distinctive elements .
Morda je težje določiti, da bi lahko bila javnost zmedena glede izvora zaradi podobnosti, ki se nanašajo izključno na nerazlikovalne elemente.
[3: See the Guidelines, Part C, Opposition, Section 2, Double Identity and Likelihood of Confusion, Chapter 5, Distinctiveness of the Earlier Mark.]
[3: Glej Smernice, del C: Ugovor, razdelek 2: Dvojna enakost in verjetnost zmede, poglavje 5: Razlikovalni učinek prejšnje znamke.]
The Office and a number of trade mark offices of the European Union have agreed on a Common Practice under the European Trade Mark and Designs Network with regard to the impact on likelihood of confusion of components that are non-distinctive or distinctive only to a low degree.
Urad in številni uradi za blagovne znamke v Evropski uniji so v okviru Evropske mreže blagovnih znamk in modelov sprejeli skupno prakso v zvezi z vplivom na verjetnost zmede sestavnih delov z nerazlikovalnim učinkom ali samo šibkim razlikovalnim učinkom.
6.1 Common components with a low degree of distinctiveness
Skupni sestavni deli s šibkim razlikovalnim učinkom
According to the Common Practice , when the marks share an element with a low degree of distinctiveness, the assessment of likelihood of confusion will focus on the impact of the non-coinciding components on the overall impression of the marks, as previously assessed in the comparison of signs.
V skladu s skupno prakso bo presoja verjetnosti zmede, kadar je znamkam skupen element s šibkim razlikovalnim učinkom, osredotočena na vpliv neujemajočih se sestavnih delov na splošen vtis znamk, kot se je prej presojalo pri primerjavi znakov.
That assessment takes into account the similarities/differences and distinctiveness of the non-coinciding components.
Pri tej presoji se upoštevajo podobnosti/razlike in razlikovalni učinek neujemajočih se sestavnih delov.
[4: For the purposes of the Common Practice, all the other factors that may be relevant for the global appreciation of likelihood of confusion are deemed not to affect the outcome.
[4: V skupni praksi velja, da vsi drugi dejavniki, ki so morda pomembni za celovito presojo verjetnosti zmede, ne vplivajo na rezultat.
It is also considered that the goods and services are identical.]
Šteje se tudi, da so blago in storitve enaki.]
A coincidence in an element with a low degree of distinctiveness will not normally on its own lead to likelihood of confusion.
Ujemanje pri elementu s šibkim razlikovalnim učinkom običajno ne povzroči verjetnosti zmede.
However, there may be likelihood of confusion if the other components are of a lower (or equally low) degree of distinctiveness or are of insignificant visual impact and the overall impression of the marks is similar.
Lahko pa verjetnost zmede nastane, če imajo drugi sestavni deli še šibkejši (ali enako šibek) razlikovalni učinek ali če imajo nepomemben vizualni vpliv in če je splošen vtis znamk podoben.