natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As the Office does not assess commercial success, even minimal use (but not mere token or internal use) can be sufficient to be deemed ‘genuine', as long as it is viewed as warranted in the economic sector concerned to maintain or acquire a share in the market.
Ker Urad ne presoja poslovnega uspeha, lahko celo minimalna uporaba (vendar ne le simbolična ali notranja uporaba) zadostuje, da jo je mogoče obravnavati kot resno in dejansko, če se v zadevnem gospodarskem sektorju šteje kot utemeljeno za ohranjanje ali pridobitev deleža na trgu.
The decision indicates what evidence was submitted.
V odločbi je navedeno, kateri dokazi so bili predloženi.
However, in general, only the evidence relevant for the conclusion is mentioned.
Vendar so na splošno navedeni le dokazi, ki so pomembni za sklepno ugotovitev.
If the evidence is found convincing, it suffices for the Office to indicate those documents that were used to come to this conclusion and why.
Če se ugotovi, da so dokazi prepričljivi, zadostuje, da Urad navede, kateri dokumenti so se uporabili za sprejetje te sklepne ugotovitve in zakaj.
If an opposition is rejected because the proof of use was not sufficient, neither likelihood of confusion nor Article 8(5) EUTMR, if claimed, is to be addressed.
Če je ugovor zavrnjen, ker dokazi o uporabi niso bili zadostni, ni treba obravnavati ne vprašanja verjetnosti zmede ne člena 8(5) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, če se uveljavlja.
3.7.4 Treatment of confidential information
Obravnavanje zaupnih informacij
Pursuant to Article 113(1) EUTMR, the Office must publish its decisions.
V skladu s členom 113(1) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU mora Urad svoje odločbe objaviti.
On the other hand, pursuant to Article 114(4) EUTMR, upon the prior request of a party with a special interest in keeping parts of the file confidential, the data concerned must be kept confidential vis-à-vis the public.
Po drugi strani je treba v skladu s členom 114(4) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU na predhodno zahtevo stranke, ki je izkazala poseben interes za ohranitev zaupnosti delov spisa, ohranjati zaupnost zadevnih podatkov v razmerju do javnosti.
However, the need to keep certain data confidential does not exempt the Office from the obligation to state the reasons for its decisions.
Vendar potreba po ohranjanju zaupnosti nekaterih podatkov Urad ne oprošča obveznosti, da navede razloge za svoje odločbe.
[13: Note, however, that no parts of the file can be kept confidential vis-à-vis the other party to the proceedings due to the right of defence (see the Guidelines, Part C, Opposition, Section 1, Procedural Matters, paragraph 4.4.4).]
[13: Upoštevati je treba, da zaradi pravice do obrambe nobenega dela spisa ni mogoče obravnavati zaupno v razmerju do druge stranke v postopku (glej Smernice, del C: Ugovor, razdelek 1: Postopkovne zadeve, odstavek 4.4.4).]
Given the public nature of decisions, the justified interest of a party in keeping certain information confidential vis-à-vis the public has to be reconciled with the Office's duty to state reasons.
Zaradi javne narave odločb je treba upravičeni interes stranke za ohranitev zaupnosti nekaterih informacij v razmerju do javnosti uskladiti z obveznostjo Urada glede navedbe razlogov.
It may be problematic to reason without divulging confidential business data, but this can be done by referring to those data in a general manner and without disclosing concrete data.
Obrazložitev brez razkritja zaupnih poslovnih podatkov je lahko problematična, vendar je mogoča s splošnim sklicevanjem na te podatke brez razkritja konkretnih podatkov.
For example, the decision may refer to the invoices submitted, indicate the time span, frequency and territory of sales, the significance of the sales volumes they represent and whether they are sufficient to support the finding of genuine use.
V odločbi se je na primer mogoče sklicevati na predložene račune, navesti časovno obdobje in pogostnost prodaje ter ozemlje, na katerem je ta potekala, pomen obsega prodaje, ki je razviden iz računov, in to, ali obseg prodaje podpira ugotovitev glede resne in dejanske uporabe.
What is important is that the decision reflects that the relevant business data were considered and assessed in relation to the kind of goods and services at issue and the characteristics of the relevant market.
Pomembno je, da so v odločbi upoštevani ustrezni poslovni podatki in da se je o njih presojalo glede na vrsto spornega blaga in storitev ter značilnosti zadevnega trga.
Simply stating whether the relevant factors (time, place, nature and extent of use) have been fulfilled or not is not sufficient to support the final conclusion on the issue of genuine use.
Le navedba, ali so bili izpolnjeni ustrezni dejavniki (čas, kraj, narava in obseg uporabe), ne podpira končne ugotovitve glede vprašanja resne in dejanske uporabe.
Finally, it must be clarified that, notwithstanding the confidentiality of an entire submission or annex, data contained therein that are clearly within the public domain (e.g. in the form of press extracts) can be referred to in the decision.
Nazadnje je treba pojasniti, da se je ne glede na zaupnost celotne vloge ali priloge v odločbi mogoče sklicevati na podatke iz vloge in priloge, ki so očitno javni (npr. ker so predloženi v obliki izvlečkov iz tiskanih medijev).
3.7.5 Examples
Primeri
The following cases present some of the decisions of the Office and the Court (with different outcomes) where the overall assessment of the submitted evidence was important.
Naslednji primeri ponazarjajo nekatere odločbe Urada in Sodišča (z različnimi izidi), v katerih je bila pomembna celovita presoja predloženih dokazov.
3.7.5.1 Genuine use accepted
Sprejeta resna in dejanska uporaba
3.7.5.2 Genuine use not accepted
Zavrnjena resna in dejanska uporaba
Annex: 5year period for assessing use of national trade marks
Priloga: Petletno obdobje za presojo uporabe nacionalnih blagovnih znamk
According to Article 47(2) EUTMR, the proprietor of an earlier EUTM who has given notice of opposition against the registration of an EUTM application must, where the EUTM applicant so requests, submit proof that its earlier EUTM has been put to genuine use in the European Union in connection with the goods or services for which it was registered during the 5 years preceding the filing or priority date of the EUTM application, provided the earlier EUTM has at that date been registered for more than 5 years (‘5-year grace period').
V skladu s členom 47(2) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU mora imetnik prejšnje blagovne znamke EU, ki je vložil ugovor zoper registracijo prijave blagovne znamke EU, na zahtevo prijavitelja blagovne znamke EU priskrbeti dokaz o tem, da se je v obdobju petih let pred datumom vložitve ali datumom prednostne pravice prijave blagovne znamke EU prejšnja blagovna znamka EU resno in dejansko uporabljala v Evropski uniji za blago ali storitve, za katere je registrirana, če je bila prejšnja blagovna znamka EU na ta dan registrirana najmanj pet let (v nadaljnjem besedilu: petletni odložni rok).
[14: Date of publication of the contested EUTM application in the case of oppositions filed before 23/03/2016, see paragraph 2.5.2.]
[14: V primeru ugovorov, vloženih pred 23. marcem 2016, datum, ko je bila objavljena izpodbijana prijava blagovne znamke EU, glej odstavek 2.5.2.]
Equally, the proprietor of an earlier national mark that has given notice of opposition against the registration of a European Union trade mark must, according to Article 47(3) EUTMR and where the EUTM applicant so requests, submit proof that its earlier national trade mark has been put to genuine use in the Member State in connection with the goods and services for which it was registered during a period of 5 years preceding the filing or priority date of the EUTM application, provided the earlier national mark has at that date been registered for more than 5 years.
Podobno mora v skladu s členom 47(3) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU imetnik prejšnje nacionalne znamke, ki je vložil ugovor zoper registracijo blagovne znamke EU, na zahtevo prijavitelja blagovne znamke EU priskrbeti dokaz, da se je v petletnem obdobju pred datumom vložitve ali datumom prednostne pravice prijave blagovne znamke EU njegova prejšnja nacionalna blagovna znamka resno in dejansko uporabljala v državi članici za blago ali storitve, za katere je registrirana, če je bila prejšnja nacionalna znamka na ta dan registrirana najmanj pet let.
[15: Date of publication of the contested EUTM application in the case of oppositions filed before 23/03/2016, see paragraph 2.5.2.]
[15: V primeru ugovorov, vloženih pred 23. marcem 2016, datum, ko je bila objavljena izpodbijana prijava blagovne znamke EU, glej odstavek 2.5.2.]
The date of registration of an EUTM is the date on which it is entered in the Register of European Union trade marks.
Datum registracije blagovne znamke EU je datum, ko je blagovna znamka EU vpisana v register blagovnih znamk Evropske unije.
Consequently, the 5-year grace period of an EUTM commences from its entry in the Register of European Union trade marks.
Petletni odložni rok za blagovno znamko EU zato začne teči od njenega vpisa v navedeni register.
In order to determine the date of commencement of the 5-year grace period in respect of a national mark, national law is relevant.
Za opredelitev datuma začetka petletnega odložnega roka v zvezi z nacionalno blagovno je treba upoštevati nacionalno pravo.
The commencement of this period depends on the registration procedure of the Member States and, in particular, whether a Member State applies a post-registration opposition procedure (this being the case for DK, DE, FI and SE).
Začetek tega obdobja je odvisen od postopka registracije v državi članici in zlasti od tega, ali država članica uporablja postopek ugovora po registraciji (ta se uporablja na Danskem, v Nemčiji, na Finskem in Švedskem).
The following table makes reference to the relevant national provisions on non-use of a national trade mark and specifies the relevant point in time when the 5-year grace period for a national trade mark commences.
V naslednji preglednici so navedene ustrezne nacionalne določbe o neuporabi nacionalne blagovne znamke in opredeljen je upoštevni trenutek, ko začne teči petletni odložni rok za nacionalno blagovno znamko.
[16: References are to the national provisions valid on 01/06/2015.]
[16: Sklicevanja se nanašajo na nacionalne določbe, ki so veljale 1. junija 2015.]
WELLNESS 15/01/2009, C495/07,EU:C:2009:10 (preliminary ruling)
WELLNESS 15/01/2009, C495/07,EU:C:2009:10 (predhodna odločba)
The opponent owned the mark ‘WELLNESS' in Classes 25 and 32.
Vložnik ugovora je bil imetnik znamke „WELLNESS“ v razredih 25 in 32.
In the context of selling its ‘WELLNESS' clothing, it also used the mark to designate an alcohol-free drink, which was handed out in small bottles as a gift along with the clothing sold.
V okviru prodaje oblačil „WELLNESS“ je znamko uporabljal tudi za označevanje brezalkoholne pijače, ki jo je kot darilo delil v stekleničkah ob nakupu oblačil.
No drinks were sold separately under the ‘WELLNESS' mark.
Pod znamko „WELLNESS“ ni ločeno prodajal nobenih pijač.
The Court held that, where promotional items are handed out as a reward for the purchase of other goods and to encourage the sale of the latter, the mark loses its commercial raison d'être for the promotional goods and cannot be considered to have been genuinely used on the market for goods in that class (para. 22).
Sodišče je odločilo, da če se promocijski izdelki brezplačno delijo za nagrajevanje nakupa drugega blaga in spodbujanje njegove prodaje, znamka izgubi komercialni razlog za obstoj za promocijske izdelke, zato ni mogoče šteti, da se je resno in dejansko uporabljala na trgu za blago iz navedenega razreda (točka 22).
The evidence produced to show genuine use of the mark at issue may include catalogues.
Dokazi, predloženi za dokaz o resni in dejanski uporabi sporne blagovne znamke, lahko vsebujejo kataloge.
‘It must be pointed out that, in addition to items of clothing designated by different marks, more than 80 different items are offered for sale in that catalogue under the mark PETER STORM.
„[…] je treba opozoriti, da se poleg oblačil, označenih z drugimi znamkami, v [katalogu] ponuja več kot 80 različnih izdelkov za prodajo pod znamko PETER STORM.
They comprise men's and women's jackets, jumpers, trousers, tee-shirts, footwear, socks, hats and gloves, the respective characteristics of which are briefly described.
Gre za moške in ženske obleke, puloverje, hlače, majice, čevlje, nogavice, klobuke in rokavice, katerih značilnosti so na kratko opisane.
The earlier mark appears, in stylised characters, next to each item.
Prejšnja znamka je v stilizirani pisavi natisnjena ob vsakem izdelku.
In that catalogue, the prices of the items in GBP and the reference number for each item are stated' (paras 3839).
V tem katalogu so navedene cene izdelkov v GBP in referenca vsakega izdelka“ (točki 38 in 39).
The General Court found that the use of the sign Schuhpark for footwear on advertisements, bags and invoices was not meant to identify the origin of the shoes (which bore their own mark or no mark at all) but rather the company name or trade name of the shoe retailer.
Splošno sodišče je ugotovilo, da namen uporabe znaka Schuhpark za obutev na oglasnih sporočilih, vrečkah in računih ni bil identificirati izvora čevljev (ki so bili opremljeni s svojo blagovno znamko ali z njo sploh niso bili opremljeni), temveč ime podjetja ali trgovsko ime trgovca z obutvijo na drobno.
This was considered insufficient to establish a link between the sign Schuhpark and the shoes.
Štelo se je, da to ne zadostuje za opredelitev povezave med znakom Schuhpark in čevlji.
In other words, Schuhpark may well be a mark for the retail of shoes, but it was not used as a trade mark for goods (paras 3132).
Z drugimi besedami, čeprav je Schuhpark znamka za prodajo obutve na drobno, se ni uporabljala kot blagovna znamka za blago (točki 31 in 32).
The earlier trade mark was registered in Class 42 for, inter alia, the services of a patent attorney.
Prejšnja blagovna znamka je bila registrirana v razredu 42 za med drugim storitve patentnega zastopnika.
Its use on invoices, business cards and business correspondence was considered sufficient to show genuine use in connection with the services of a patent attorney.
Štelo se je, da uporaba blagovne znamke na računih, poslovnih vizitkah in v poslovni korespondenci zadostuje kot dokaz o njeni resni in dejanski uporabi v zvezi s storitvami patentnega zastopnika.
The fact that there is no ‘direct bilateral link' between the publisher and the recipient of the services does not impair such a finding of genuine use.
Dejstvo, da med založnikom in prejemnikom storitev ni nobene neposredne dvostranske povezave, ne vpliva na takšno ugotovitev obstoja resne in dejanske uporabe.
This is because the magazine is not distributed free of charge, which could lend credibility to the claim that payment of the price of the magazine constitutes remuneration for the service provided (paras 3135).
Razlog je, da se revija ne distribuira brezplačno, kar bi lahko dalo težo trditvi, da plačilo cene revije pomeni plačilo za opravljeno storitev (točke od 31 do 35).
Services: services of a publishing company in Class 41.
Storitve: storitve založb iz razreda 41.
The Board confirmed that the evidence (consisting of catalogues, press notes and advertisements) read in conjunction was enough to prove genuine use of the trade mark.
Odbor za pritožbe je potrdil, da dokazi (ki zajemajo kataloge, sporočila za javnost in oglase), ki se berejo v zvezi s tem, zadostujejo za dokaz o resni in dejanski uporabi blagovne znamke.
‘Although the order record and the receipt of the bank account do not provide any information on how and to what extent the mark was used in Spain, the remaining documents, namely the catalogues, press notes and advertisements, when read in conjunction, demonstrate that during the relevant period, the opponent has published in Spain books and magazines under the trade mark BLUME.
Čeprav evidenca naročil in izpisek z bančnega računa ne zagotavljata informacij, kako in v kakšnem obsegu se je znamka uporabljala v Španiji, preostali dokumenti, in sicer katalogi, sporočila za javnost in oglasi, če se berejo v zvezi s tem, dokazujejo, da je vložnik ugovora v upoštevnem obdobju v Španiji izdajal knjige in revije pod blagovno znamko BLUME.
Even if the opponent does not provide any invoices, orders or sales figures, there is some reason to assume that it advertised its books and magazines, promoted and sold them under the trade mark BLUME.
Tudi če vložnik ugovora ne predloži računov, naročilnic ali podatkov o prodaji, obstajajo nekateri razlogi za domnevo, da je knjige in revije oglaševal, promoviral in prodajal pod blagovno znamko BLUME.
Although the advertising documents and the press notes were identified and dated by the opponent, the trade mark BLUME is always mentioned in the press notes and on the cover page of the quoted books.
Čeprav je vložnik ugovora opredelil oglaševalske dokumente in sporočila za javnost ter jih opremil z datumom, je blagovna znamka BLUME vedno omenjena v sporočilih za javnost in na naslovnici navedenih knjig.
In addition, the text is in the Spanish language and the price mentioned in pesetas.
Poleg tega je besedilo v španskem jeziku, navedene cene pa v pezetah.
When read together with the catalogues, these press notes demonstrate that they refer to some of the books expressly quoted in the catalogues' (para. 23).
Če se ta sporočila za javnost berejo skupaj s katalogi, dokazujejo, da se nanašajo na nekatere od knjig, ki so izrecno navedene v katalogih (točka 23).
BIODANZA 13/04/2010, R 1149/20092, BIODANZA (fig.) / BIODANZA; confirmed 08/03/2012, T298/10, Biodanza, EU:T:2012:113
BIODANZA 13/04/2010, R 1149/20092, BIODANZA (fig.) / BIODANZA; potrjena 08/03/2012, T298/10, Biodanza, EU:T:2012:113
It follows clearly from the finding of the contested decision that the evidence of use submitted by the opponent consists solely of advertisements that can prove only that the opponent advertised a yearly ‘BIODANZA' festival during the whole of the relevant period and workshops on both a regular and irregular basis from 2002.
Iz ugotovitve izpodbijane odločbe očitno izhaja, da dokazi o uporabi, ki jih je predložil vložnik ugovora, zajemajo le oglase, ki lahko dokažejo le, da je v celotnem upoštevnem obdobju oglaševal letno prireditev „BIODANZA“, delavnice pa redno in neredno od leta 2002.
The mere existence of advertisements could, at most, make it probable or credible that the services advertised under the earlier mark were sold or, at least, offered for sale within the relevant territory, but it cannot prove this, as was unduly supposed by the contested decision.
Le obstoj oglasov bi lahko kvečjemu prispeval k verjetnosti ali verodostojnosti dejstva, da so bile storitve, oglaševane pod prejšnjo znamko, prodane ali vsaj ponujene v prodajo na upoštevnem ozemlju, vendar tega ne more dokazati, kot se je neustrezno domnevalo v izpodbijani odločbi.
The opponent submitted ‘extracts from the opponent's websites for different countries'.
Vložnik ugovora je predložil izvlečke s svojih spletnih strani za različne države.
WALZERTRAUM 17/01/2013, T355/09, Walzer Traum, EU:T:2013:22; confirmed 17/07/2014, C141/13 P, Walzer Traum, EU:C:2014:2089
WALZERTRAUM 17/01/2013, T355/09, Walzer Traum, EU:T:2013:22; potrjena 17/07/2014, C141/13 P, Walzer Traum, EU:C:2014:2089
The opponent, a confectioner, which owns the German trade mark ‘WALZERTRAUM' for goods in Class 30, sought to prove the extent of use of its mark by submitting evidence relating to an advertising brochure published on the internet, which gives general information about its working methods, the ingredients used for its products and the product range, including its ‘WALZERTRAUM' chocolate.
Vložnik ugovora, pekarna, ki je imetnik nemške blagovne znamke „WALZERTRAUM“ za blago iz razreda 30, je, da bi dokazal obseg uporabe svoje blagovne znamke, predložil dokaze v zvezi z oglaševalsko brošuro, ki je objavljena na spletu in v kateri so navedene splošne informacije o njegovih delovnih metodah, sestavinah, ki se uporabljajo za njegove izdelke, in ponudbi izdelkov, vključno s čokolado „WALZERTRAUM“.
However, the goods could not be ordered online via the web page.
Vendar blaga ni bilo mogoče naročiti na spletni strani.
For this reason the General Court held that a connection between the website and the number of items sold could not be established (para. 47).
Splošno sodišče je zato odločilo, da ni mogoče opredeliti povezave med spletno stranjo in številom prodanih izdelkov (točka 47).
The opponent has submitted, inter alia, internet extracts from the home pages of several tax consultancies using the opposing mark.
Vložnik ugovora je med drugim predložil spletne izvlečke z domačih strani več družb za davčno svetovanje, ki so uporabljale znamko, na kateri temelji ugovor.
The General Court considered that the indications on the internet pages allowed the reader to establish a link between the trade mark and the services provided (paras 3940).
Splošno sodišče je menilo, da so navedbe na spletnih straneh bralcu omogočale povezovanje blagovne znamke in zagotovljenih storitev (točki 39 in 40).
‘[E]xcerpts from third parties' websites, despite having been printed out on 10 June 2008, contain consumers' comments about ‘SKUNKFUNK' clothes and shops dated within the relevant period.
Izvlečki s spletnih strani tretjih oseb, čeprav so bili natisnjeni 10. junija 2008, vključujejo pripombe strank o oblačilih in trgovinah „SKUNKFUNK“, ki so bile datirane v upoštevnem obdobju.
In particular, as regards the relevant territory, the documents show various comments made by consumers in Spain and dated December 2004 and February-March-April-May-July 2007.
Zlasti v zvezi z upoštevnim ozemljem dokumenti vsebujejo različne pripombe strank iz Španije iz decembra 2004 ter februarja, marca, aprila, maja in julija 2007.
Moreover, as the Opposition Division pointed out, a blog comment (dated 4 March 2007) on the Internet page www.cybereuskadi.com mentions that the opponent (‘designer of Skunkfunk') “exports surf clothes worldwide and has a turnover of nearly 7 million euros per year”' (para. 21).
Kot je poleg tega poudaril oddelek za ugovore, je v pripombi iz spletnega dnevnika (z dne 4. marca 2007) na spletni strani www.cybereuskadi.com navedeno, da vložnik ugovora („oblikovalec oblačil Skunkfunk“) izvaža oblačila za deskanje po vsem svetu in ima letni promet v višini skoraj 7 milijonov EUR (točka 21).
Case No Earlier trade mark Comment
Št. zadeve Prejšnja znamka Pripomba
11/05/2006, C416/04 P, Vitafruit VITAFRUT Use considered sufficient, even though the earlier Spanish mark was not present in a substantial part of the territory of Spain as the evidence referred to the sale of everyday consumer goods (concentrated fruit juices) to only a single customer in Spain (paras 60, 66 and 76).
11/05/2006, C416/04 P, C416/04 P VITAFRUT Uporaba se je štela za zadostno, čeprav prejšnja španska znamka ni bila prisotna na večjem delu ozemlja Španije, glede na to, da so se dokazi nanašali na prodajo običajnega potrošniškega blaga (koncentriranih sadnih sokov) samo eni stranki v Španiji (točke 60, 66 in 76).
04/06/2015, T254/13, EU:T:2015:156 STAYER Genuine use may result from the export to a single operator located outside Europe, who can be an intermediary, for the purpose of selling to the end consumer in a non-EU country.
04/06/2015, T254/13, EU:T:2015:156 STAYER Resna in dejanska uporaba lahko izhaja iz izvoza enemu gospodarskemu subjektu s sedežem zunaj Unije, ki je lahko posrednik, za namene prodaje proizvodov končnemu potrošniku v tretji državi.
Proof that the products have been put on the market in the non-EU importing country is not required (paras 57-61).
Dokaza, da se proizvodi dajejo na trg v državi uvoznici, ki je tretja država, ni treba predložiti (točke od 57 do 61).
14/07/2010, R 602/20092 RED BARON The Board indicated that sales in Austria and Great Britain from the Netherlands also constituted genuine use in the Netherlands (para. 42).
14/07/2010, R 602/20092 RED BARON Odbor za pritožbe je navedel, da tudi prodaja nizozemskega blaga v Avstriji in Veliki Britaniji pomeni resno in dejansko uporabo (točka 42).