natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.
V primeru, da do sprejetja te uredbe sporazum o prilagoditvi trgovinskih koncesij, določenih v okviru stabilizacijsko-pridružitvenega sporazuma, ni podpisan in ga Unija ter Bosna in Hercegovina ne začneta začasno uporabljati, bi bilo treba s 1. januarjem 2016 začasno opustiti preferenciale, ki so bili odobreni Bosni in Hercegovini.
Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community, of the one part, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, of the other part (OJ L 233, 30.8.2008, p. 6).
Ko Unija ter Bosna in Hercegovina podpišeta in začneta začasno uporabljati sporazum o prilagoditvi trgovinskih koncesij v okviru stabilizacijsko-pridružitvenega sporazuma, bi bilo treba te preferenciale ponovno vzpostaviti –
Regulation (EU) 2015/2424 of the European Parliament and of the Council
Uredba (EU) 2015/2424 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark and Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 on the fees payable to the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
o spremembi Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 207/2009 o blagovni znamki Skupnosti ter Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 2868/95 za izvedbo Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 40/94 o znamki Skupnosti in razveljavitvi Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 2869/95 o pristojbinah, ki se plačujejo Uradu za harmonizacijo notranjega trga (blagovne znamke in modeli)
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 118, first paragraph, thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije in zlasti prvega odstavka člena 118 Pogodbe,
Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 [2], which was codified in 2009 as Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 [3], created a system of trade mark protection specific to the European Union which provided for the protection of trade marks at the level of the Union, in parallel to the protection of trade marks available at the level of the Member States according to the national trade mark systems, harmonised by Council Directive 89/104/EEC [4], which was codified as Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [5].
Z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 40/94 [2], ki je bila kodificirana leta 2009 z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 207/2009 [3], je bil uveden poseben sistem Evropske unije za varstvo blagovnih znamk, ki je omogočil varstvo blagovnih znamk na ravni Unije, vzporedno z varstvom blagovnih znamk na ravni držav članic v skladu z nacionalnimi sistemi blagovnih znamk, harmoniziranimi z Direktivo Sveta 89/104/EGS [4], ki je bila kodificirana z Direktivo 2008/95/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [5].
As a consequence of the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the terminology of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 should be updated.
Zaradi začetka veljavnosti Lizbonske pogodbe bi bilo treba terminologijo iz Uredbe (ES) št. 207/2009 posodobiti.
This entails the replacement of ‘Community trade mark’ by ‘European Union trade mark’ (‘EU trade mark’).
To pomeni, da bi bilo treba izraz „blagovna znamka Skupnosti“ nadomestiti z izrazom „blagovna znamka Evropske unije“ (v nadaljnjem besedilu: blagovna znamka EU).
In order to better reflect the actual work carried out by the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (trade marks and designs), its name should be replaced by ‘European Union Intellectual Property Office’ (‘the Office’).
Da bi se bolje odražalo dejansko delo, bi bilo treba ime „Urad za usklajevanje na notranjem trgu (blagovne znamke in modeli)“ nadomestiti z imenom „Urad Evropske unije za intelektualno lastnino“ (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Urad).
Further to the Commission's communication of 16 July 2008 on an industrial property rights strategy for Europe, the Commission carried out a comprehensive evaluation of the overall functioning of the trade mark system in Europe as a whole, covering Union and national levels and the interrelation between the two.
Komisija je na podlagi svojega sporočila z dne 16. julija 2008 o strategiji pravic industrijske lastnine za Evropo opravila celovito vrednotenje splošnega delovanja sistema blagovnih znamk v Evropi kot celoti, pri čemer je zajela raven Unije in nacionalno raven ter odnos med njima.
In its conclusions of 25 May 2010 on the future revision of the trade mark system in the European Union, the Council called on the Commission to present proposals for the revision of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 and Directive 2008/95/EC.
Svet je v sklepih z dne 25. maja 2010 o prihodnji reviziji sistema blagovnih znamk v Evropski uniji Komisijo pozval, da predstavi predloge za revizijo Uredbe (ES) št. 207/2009 in Direktive 2008/95/ES.
The experience acquired since the establishment of the Community trade mark system has shown that undertakings from within the Union and from third countries have accepted the system which has become a successful and viable complement and alternative to the protection of trade marks at the level of the Member States.
Izkušnje, pridobljene po uvedbi sistema blagovnih znamk Skupnosti, so pokazale, da je ta sistem uspešno in učinkovito dopolnilo ter alternativa varstvu blagovnih znamk na ravni držav članic in da so ga podjetja v Uniji in tretjih državah sprejela.
National trade marks continue nevertheless to be necessary for those undertakings which do not want protection of their trade marks at Union level, or which are unable to obtain Union-wide protection while national protection does not face any obstacles.
Nacionalne blagovne znamke pa so še naprej potrebne za tista podjetja, ki svojih blagovnih znamk ne želijo zaščititi na ravni Unije ali ne morejo pridobiti varstva, ki bi veljala za vso Unijo, na ravni nacionalnega varstva pa se ne soočajo z nobenimi ovirami.
It should be left to each person seeking trade mark protection to decide whether the protection is sought only as a national trade mark in one or more Member States, or only as an EU trade mark, or both.
Vsaki osebi, ki želi zaščititi blagovno znamko, bi morala biti prepuščena odločitev, ali jo bo zaščitila samo kot nacionalno blagovno znamko v eni ali več državah članicah ali samo kot blagovno znamko EU ali kot oboje.
While the evaluation of the overall functioning of the Community trade mark system confirmed that many aspects of that system, including the fundamental principles on which it is based, have stood the test of time and continue to meet business needs and expectations, the Commission concluded in its communication ‘A Single Market for Intellectual Property Rights’ of 24 May 2011 that there is a need to modernise the trade mark system in the Union by making it more effective, efficient and consistent as a whole and by adapting it to the internet era.
Pri vrednotenju splošnega delovanja sistema blagovnih znamk Skupnosti je bilo sicer potrjeno, da so številni vidiki tega sistema, vključno z osnovnimi načeli, na katerih temelji, še vedno aktualni ter skladni s potrebami in pričakovanji podjetij, vendar je Komisija v svojem sporočilu z naslovom „Enotni trg na področju varstva pravic intelektualne lastnine“ z dne 24. maja 2011 ugotovila, da je treba sistem blagovnih znamk v Uniji posodobiti, da bo v celoti postal uspešnejši, učinkovitejši in skladnejši, ter ga prilagoditi internetni dobi.
In parallel with the improvements and amendments of the EU trade mark system, national trade mark laws and practices should be further harmonised and brought into line with the EU trade mark system to the extent appropriate in order to create as far as possible equal conditions for the registration and protection of trade marks throughout the Union.
Skupaj z izboljšavami in spremembami sistema blagovnih znamk EU bi bilo treba dodatno harmonizirati tudi zakonodajo in prakse na področju nacionalnih blagovnih znamk in jih ustrezno prilagoditi sistemu blagovne znamke EU, da bi ustvarili čim bolj enake pogoje za registracijo in varstvo blagovnih znamk v vsej Uniji.
In order to allow for more flexibility while also ensuring greater legal certainty with regard to the means of representation of trade marks, the requirement of graphic representability should be deleted from the definition of an EU trade mark.
Da bi omogočili večjo prožnost in obenem zagotovili večjo pravno varnost glede načina prikaza blagovnih znamk, bi bilo treba iz opredelitve blagovne znamke EU črtati zahtevo glede grafičnega prikaza.
A sign should be permitted to be represented in any appropriate form using generally available technology, and thus not necessarily by graphic means, as long as the representation is clear, precise, self-contained, easily accessible, intelligible, durable and objective.
Dovoliti bi bilo treba, da je znak prikazan v kakršni koli ustrezni obliki, pri kateri se uporabi splošno dostopna tehnologija, torej ne nujno grafično, pod pogojem, da je prikaz jasen, natančen, samozadosten, zlahka dostopen, razumljiv, trajen in objektiven.
Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 currently falls short of offering the same degree of protection to designations of origin and geographical indications as other instruments of Union law.
Uredba (ES) št. 207/2009 ne zagotavlja enake stopnje zaščite za označbe porekla in geografske označbe kot drugi instrumenti prava Unije.
It is therefore necessary to clarify the absolute grounds for refusal concerning designations of origin and geographical indications and to ensure that such grounds for refusal are fully consistent with relevant Union legislation and national law providing for protection of those intellectual property titles.
Zato je treba pojasniti absolutne razloge za zavrnitev v zvezi z označbami porekla in geografskimi označbami ter zagotoviti popolno skladnost takšnih razlogov za zavrnitev z zadevno zakonodajo Unije in nacionalnim pravom o zaščiti navedenih pravic iz naslova intelektualne lastnine.
For reasons of coherence with other Union legislation, the scope of those absolute grounds should be extended to cover also protected traditional terms for wine and traditional specialities guaranteed.
Zaradi skladnosti z drugo zakonodajo Unije bi bilo treba področje uporabe navedenih absolutnih razlogov razširiti tako, da bi vključevalo tudi zaščitene tradicionalne izraze za vina in zajamčene tradicionalne posebnosti.
In order to maintain strong protection of rights in designations of origin and geographical indications protected at Union and national levels, it is necessary to clarify that those rights entitle any person authorised under the relevant law to oppose a later application for the registration of an EU trade mark, regardless of whether or not those rights are also grounds for refusal to be taken into account ex officio by the examiner.
Da bi ohranili trdno zaščito pravic pri označbah porekla in geografskih označbah, zaščitenih na ravni Unije in na nacionalni ravni, je treba pojasniti, da ima na podlagi relevantnega prava vsaka oseba pravico, da ugovarja poznejši prošnji za registracijo blagovne znamke EU, ne glede na to, ali so navedene pravice tudi razlogi za zavrnitev, ki jih mora preizkuševalec upoštevati po uradni dolžnosti.
In order to ensure legal certainty and full consistency with the principle of priority, under which a registered earlier trade mark takes precedence over later registered trade marks, it is necessary to provide that the enforcement of rights conferred by an EU trade mark should be without prejudice to the rights of proprietors acquired prior to the filing or priority date of the EU trade mark.
Zaradi zagotovitve pravne varnosti in popolne skladnosti s prednostnim načelom, na podlagi katerega ima predhodno registrirana blagovna znamka prednost pred pozneje registriranimi blagovnimi znamkami, je treba določiti, da uveljavljanje pravic, podeljenih z blagovno znamko EU, ne bi smelo posegati v pravice, ki so jih njihovi imetniki pridobili pred datumom vložitve prijave ali datumom prednostne pravice blagovne znamke EU.
This is in conformity with Article 16(1) of the Agreement on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights of 15 April 1994.
To je v skladu s členom 16(1) Sporazuma o trgovinskih vidikih pravic intelektualne lastnine z dne 15. aprila 1994.
Confusion as to the commercial source from which the goods or services emanate may occur when a company uses the same or a similar sign as a trade name in a way such that a link is established between the company bearing the name and the goods or services coming from that company.
Če podjetje uporablja znak, ki je enak ali podoben trgovskemu imenu, tako da je pri tem mogoče vzpostaviti povezavo med podjetjem z navedenim imenom ter blagom ali storitvami navedenega podjetja, lahko pride do zmede glede trgovinskega izvora blaga ali storitev.
Infringement of an EU trade mark should therefore also comprise the use of the sign as a trade name or similar designation as long as the use is made for the purposes of distinguishing goods or services.
Kršitve blagovne znamke EU bi zato morale vključevati tudi uporabo znaka kot trgovskega imena ali podobne označbe, če se uporablja za razlikovanje blaga ali storitev.
In order to ensure legal certainty and full consistency with specific Union legislation, it is appropriate to provide that the proprietor of an EU trade mark should be entitled to prohibit a third party from using a sign in comparative advertising where such comparative advertising is contrary to Directive 2006/114/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [6].
Da bi zagotovili pravno varnost in popolno usklajenost s specifično zakonodajo Unije, bi bilo ustrezno, da bi lahko imetnik blagovne znamke EU tretji osebi prepovedal uporabo znaka v primerjalnem oglaševanju, kadar je to v nasprotju z Direktivo 2006/114/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [6].
In order to strengthen trade mark protection and combat counterfeiting more effectively, and in line with international obligations of the Union under the framework of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), in particular Article V of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) on freedom of transit and, as regards generic medicines, the ‘Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and public health’ adopted by the Doha WTO Ministerial Conference on 14 November 2001, the proprietor of an EU trade mark should be entitled to prevent third parties from bringing goods, in the course of trade, into the Union without being released for free circulation there, where such goods come from third countries and bear without authorisation a trade mark which is identical or essentially identical with the EU trade mark registered in respect of such goods.
Zaradi okrepitve varstva blagovnih znamk in učinkovitejšega boja proti ponarejanju, v skladu z mednarodnimi obveznostmi Unije v okviru Svetovne trgovinske organizacije (STO), zlasti na podlagi člena V Splošnega sporazuma o carinah in trgovini, ki se nanaša na prosti tranzit, in – v zvezi z generičnimi zdravili – Deklaracije o sporazumu TRIPS in javnem zdravju, ki jo je 14. novembra 2001 sprejela ministrska konferenca STO v Dohi, bi moral imetnik blagovne znamke EU imeti pravico, da tretjim osebam prepreči, da bi v gospodarskem prometu v Unijo vnesle blago, ne da bi bilo to blago tam sproščeno v prosti promet, če takšno blago prihaja iz tretjih držav in brez dovoljenja nosi blagovno znamko, ki je enaka ali v bistvenem enaka blagovni znamki EU, registrirani za takšno blago.
To this effect, it should be permissible for EU trade mark proprietors to prevent the entry of infringing goods and their placement in all customs situations, including transit, transhipment, warehousing, free zones, temporary storage, inward processing or temporary admission, also when such goods are not intended to be placed on the market of the Union.
V ta namen bi bilo treba dovoliti, da imetniki blagovne znamke EU preprečijo vnos blaga, ki krši pravice, in izvajanje kakršnih koli carinskih postopkov za takšno blago, vključno s tranzitom, pretovarjanjem, skladiščenjem, prostimi conami, začasno hrambo, aktivnim oplemenitenjem ali začasnim uvozom, tudi kadar takšno blago ni namenjeno dajanju na trg v Uniji.
In performing customs controls, the customs authorities should make use of the powers and procedures laid down in Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council [7], also at the request of the right holders.
Carinski organi bi morali pri izvajanju carinskega nadzora uporabljati pooblastila in postopke iz Uredbe (EU) št. 608/2013 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [7], tudi na zahtevo imetnikov pravic.
In particular, the customs authorities should carry out the relevant controls on the basis of risk analysis criteria.
Zlasti bi morali izvajati ustrezen nadzor na podlagi meril analize tveganja.
In order to reconcile the need to ensure the effective enforcement of trade mark rights with the necessity to avoid hampering the free flow of trade in legitimate goods, the entitlement of the proprietor of the EU trade mark should lapse where, during the subsequent proceedings initiated before the European Union trade mark court (‘EU trade mark court’) competent to take a substantive decision on whether the EU trade mark has been infringed, the declarant or the holder of the goods is able to prove that the proprietor of the EU trade mark is not entitled to prohibit the placing of the goods on the market in the country of final destination.
Da bi uskladili potrebo po zagotavljanju učinkovitega uveljavljanja pravic iz blagovne znamke s potrebo po odpravi ovir za prosto trgovino z zakonitim blagom, bi moral imetnik blagovne znamke zadevno pravico izgubiti, kadar deklarant ali imetnik blaga v naknadnem postopku pred Sodiščem za blagovne znamke Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: sodišče za blagovne znamke EU), pristojnem za sprejemanje meritorne odločitve o morebitni kršitvi blagovne znamke EU, lahko dokaže, da imetnik blagovne znamke EU nima pravice prepovedati dajanja blaga na trg v državi, v katero je namenjeno.
Article 28 of Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 provides that a right holder is to be liable for damages towards the holder of the goods where, inter alia, the goods in question are subsequently found not to infringe an intellectual property right.
V členu 28 Uredbe (EU) št. 608/2013 je določeno, da je imetnik pravice odgovoren za škodo, ki jo imetnik blaga utrpi, če je med drugim naknadno ugotovljeno, da zadevno blago ne krši pravice intelektualne lastnine.
With respect to international non-proprietary names (INN) as globally recognised generic names for active substances in pharmaceutical preparations, it is vital to take due account of the existing limitations on the effect of EU trade mark rights.
Kar zadeva mednarodna nelastniška imena kot svetovno priznana generična imena za aktivne snovi v farmacevtskih preparatih, je ključnega pomena, da se ustrezno upoštevajo obstoječe omejitve učinka pravic iz blagovne znamke EU.
Consequently, the proprietor of an EU trade mark should not have the right to prevent a third party from bringing goods into the Union without being released for free circulation there, based upon similarities between the INN for the active ingredient in the medicines and the trade mark.
Imetnik blagovne znamke EU zato ne bi smel imeti pravice, da tretjim osebam prepreči vnos blaga v Unijo, ne da bi bilo to blago tam sproščeno v prosti promet, zaradi podobnosti med mednarodnim nelastniškim imenom za aktivno sestavino zdravila in blagovno znamko.
In order to enable proprietors of EU trade marks to combat counterfeiting more effectively, they should be entitled to prohibit the affixing of an infringing mark to goods and preparatory acts carried out prior to the affixing.
Da bi imetnikom blagovnih znamk EU omogočili učinkovitejši boj proti ponarejanju, bi morali imeti pravico prepovedati namestitev nedovoljene znamke na blago in nekatere pripravljalne ukrepe, izvedene pred namestitvijo.
The exclusive rights conferred by an EU trade mark should not entitle the proprietor to prohibit the use of signs or indications by third parties which are used fairly and thus in accordance with honest practices in industrial and commercial matters.
Izključne pravice, podeljene z blagovno znamko EU, imetniku ne bi smele omogočati, da tretjim osebam prepove uporabo znakov ali označb, ki se uporabljajo pravično in tako v skladu z dobrimi poslovnimi običaji v industrijskih in trgovinskih zadevah.
In order to create equal conditions for trade names and EU trade marks in the event of conflicts, given that trade names are regularly granted unrestricted protection against later trade marks, such use should be only considered to include the use of the personal name of the third party.
Za trgovska imena običajno velja neomejeno varstvo glede na poznejše blagovne znamke, zato bi bilo zaradi zagotavljanja enakih pogojev za trgovska imena in blagovno znamko EU primerno, da bi taka uporaba zajemala samo osebno ime tretje osebe.
It should further permit the use of descriptive or non-distinctive signs or indications in general.
Dovoliti bi se morala tudi splošna uporaba opisnih ali nerazlikovalnih znakov ali označb.
Furthermore, the proprietor should not be entitled to prevent the fair and honest use of the EU trade mark for the purpose of identifying or referring to the goods or services as those of the proprietor.
Poleg tega imetnik ne bi smel imeti pravice prepovedati pravične in poštene uporabe blagovne znamke EU za namene opredelitve ali navajanja blaga ali storitev kot svojih.
Use of a trade mark by third parties to draw the consumer's attention to the resale of genuine goods that were originally sold by or with the consent of the proprietor of the EU trade mark in the Union should be considered as being fair as long as it is at the same time in accordance with honest practices in industrial and commercial matters.
Kadar tretje osebe blagovno znamko uporabljajo, da bi potrošnika opozorile na ponovno prodajo pristnega blaga, ki jih je prvotno prodajal imetnik blagovne znamke EU v Uniji ali so se prodajali z njegovim soglasjem, bi bilo takšno uporabo treba šteti za pravično, če je obenem v skladu z dobrimi poslovnimi običaji v industrijskih in trgovinskih zadevah.
Furthermore, this Regulation should be applied in a way that ensures full respect for fundamental rights and freedoms, and in particular the freedom of expression.
Poleg tega bi se morala ta uredba uporabljati tako, da bi zagotovili dosledno spoštovanje temeljnih pravic in svoboščin, zlasti svobode izražanja.
In order to ensure legal certainty and safeguard legitimately acquired trade mark rights, it is appropriate and necessary to lay down, without prejudice to the principle that the later trade mark cannot be enforced against the earlier trade mark, that proprietors of EU trade marks should not be entitled to oppose the use of a later trade mark if the later trade mark was acquired at a time when the earlier trade mark could not be enforced against the later trade mark.
Brez poseganja v načelo, da poznejše blagovne znamke ni mogoče uveljavljati zoper prejšnjo blagovno znamko, je zaradi zagotavljanja pravne varnosti in zaščite legitimno pridobljenih pravic iz blagovne znamke ustrezno in nujno določiti, da imetniki blagovnih znamk EU ne bi smeli imeti pravice nasprotovati uporabi poznejše blagovne znamke, če je bila poznejša blagovna znamka pridobljena v času, ko prejšnje blagovne znamke ni bilo mogoče uveljavljati zoper poznejšo.
For reasons of equity and legal certainty, the use of an EU trade mark in a form that differs in elements which do not alter the distinctive character of that mark, in the form in which it is registered, should be sufficient to preserve the rights conferred regardless of whether the trade mark in the form as used is also registered.
Zaradi pravičnosti in pravne varnosti bi morala uporaba blagovne znamke EU v obliki, ki se razlikuje v elementih, ki ne spreminjajo razlikovalnega značaja te znamke v obliki, v kateri je registrirana, zadoščati, da se ohranijo podeljene pravice, ne glede na to, ali je registrirana tudi blagovna znamka v obliki, ki se uporablja.