natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
5.2 Need to keep free 
Potreba po ohranitvi prostega dostopa
It is frequently claimed that other traders do not need the term applied for, can use more direct and straightforward indications or have synonyms at their disposal to describe the respective characteristics of the goods. 
Pogosta trditev je, da drugi trgovci ne potrebujejo izraza, za katerega je vložena prijava, da lahko uporabijo bolj neposredne in jasne označbe ali da imajo na voljo sopomenke za opis ustreznih lastnosti blaga.
All these arguments must be refused as irrelevant. 
Vse te utemeljitve je treba zavrniti kot nepomembne.
Although there is a public interest underlying Article 7(1)(c) EUTMR that descriptive terms should not be registered as trade marks so as to remain freely available to all competitors, it is not necessary for the Office to show that there is, on the part of third parties, a present or future need to use, or concrete interest in using, the descriptive term applied for (no konkretes Freihaltebedürfnis) (04/05/1999, C108/97 & C109/97, Chiemsee, EU:C:1999:230, § 35; 12/02/2004, C363/99, Postkantoor, EU:C:2004:86, § 61). 
Čeprav člen 7(1)(c) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU temelji na javnem interesu, da se opisni izrazi ne smejo registrirati kot blagovne znamke in morajo ostati na voljo vsem konkurentom, Uradu ni treba nujno izkazati, da imajo tretje osebe zdaj ali v prihodnje potrebo po uporabi ali dejanski interes za uporabo prijavljenega opisnega izraza (neobstoj konkretes Freihaltebedürfnis) (04/05/1999, C108/97 & C109/97, Chiemsee, EU:C:1999:230, § 35 in 12/02/2004, C363/99, Postkantoor, EU:C:2004:86, § 61).
Whether there are synonyms or other, even more usual, ways of expressing the descriptive meaning is thus irrelevant (12/02/2004, C265/00, Biomild, EU:C:2004:87, § 42). 
Zato ni pomembno, ali obstajajo sopomenke ali drugi še običajnejši načini izražanja opisnega pomena (12/02/2004, C265/00, Biomild, EU:C:2004:87, § 42).
5.3 Factual monopoly 
Dejanski monopol
The fact that the applicant is the only person offering the goods and services for which the mark is descriptive is not relevant for Article 7(1)(c) EUTMR. 
Dejstvo, da je prijavitelj edina oseba, ki ponuja blago in storitve, ki jih znamka opisuje, ni pomembno za člen 7(1)(c) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
However, in this case the applicant will be more likely to succeed on acquired distinctiveness. 
Vendar je v tem primeru verjetneje, da bo prijavitelj uspešen glede pridobljenega razlikovalnega učinka.
5.4 Double meaning 
Dvojni pomen
The argument frequently put forward by applicants that the terms applied for have more than one meaning, one of them not being descriptive for the goods/services, should be rejected. 
Pogosto utemeljitev, ki jo predložijo prijavitelji, da imajo izrazi, za katere je vložena prijava, več kot en pomen, od katerih eden ne opisuje lastnosti blaga ali storitev, je treba zavrniti.
It suffices for a refusal under Article 7(1)(c) EUTMR if at least one of the possible meanings of the term is descriptive in relation to the relevant goods and services (23/10/2003, C191/01 P, Doublemint, EU:C:2003:579, § 32; confirmed by 12/02/2004, C363/99, Postkantoor, EU:C:2004:86, § 97). 
Za zavrnitev v skladu s členom 7(1)(c) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU zadostuje, če vsaj eden od možnih pomenov izraza opisuje lastnosti zadevnega blaga in storitev (sodba z dne 23/10/2003, C191/01 P, Doublemint, EU:C:2003:579, § 32, ki jo potrjuje sodba z dne 12/02/2004, C363/99, Postkantoor, EU:C:2004:86, § 97).
Given that the examination must focus on the goods/services covered by the application, arguments concerning other possible meanings of the word(s) making up the trade mark applied for (that are unrelated to the goods/services concerned) are irrelevant. 
Glede na to, da se je treba pri preizkusu osredotočiti na blago ali storitve, zajete v prijavi, utemeljitve v zvezi z drugimi možnimi pomeni besede ali več besed, ki sestavljajo blagovno znamko, za katero je vložena prijava (ki se ne nanašajo na zadevno blago ali storitve), niso pomembne.
Equally, when the trade mark applied for is a composite word mark, what matters for examination purposes is the meaning, if any, associated with the sign considered as a whole, and not the possible meanings of its individual elements considered separately (08/06/2005, T315/03, Rockbass, EU:T:2005:211, § 56). 
Kadar je blagovna znamka, za katero je vložena prijava, sestavljena iz več besed, je za preizkus pomemben pomen (če ta obstaja), ki je povezan z znakom kot celoto, ne pa morebitni pomeni posameznih elementov znamke, ki se obravnavajo ločeno (08/06/2005, T315/03, Rockbass, EU:T:2005:211, § 56).
6 Scope of Objections to the Goods and Services 
Obseg uporabe ugovorov glede blaga in storitev
Almost all absolute grounds for refusal, and in particular the most frequent ones of lack of distinctiveness, descriptiveness, genericness and deceptiveness, have to be assessed with respect to the goods and/or services actually claimed. 
Skoraj vse absolutne razloge za zavrnitev, zlasti najpogostejše med njimi - neobstoj razlikovalnega učinka, opisnost, generičnost in zavajajoč učinek - je treba oceniti glede na blago in storitve, ki so dejansko navedeni v prijavi.
If an objection is raised, the Office must state specifically which ground (or grounds) for refusal apply to the mark in question, for each product or service claimed. 
Če je vložen ugovor, mora Urad natančno navesti, kateri razlog(-i) za zavrnitev se uporablja(-jo) za zadevno znamko za posamezno blago ali storitev, ki je navedena v prijavi.
It is sufficient that a ground for refusal applies to a single homogenous category of goods and/or services. 
Zadostuje že, če razlog za zavrnitev velja za eno homogeno kategorijo blaga in/ali storitev.
A homogenous category is considered a group of goods and/or services that have a sufficiently direct and specific link to each other (02/04/2009, T118/06, Ultimate fighting championship, EU:T:2009:100, § 28). 
Za homogeno kategorijo se šteje skupina blaga in/ali storitev, med katerimi obstaja dovolj neposredna in konkretna vez (02/04/2009, T118/06, Ultimate fighting championship, EU:T:2009:100, § 28).
Where the same ground or grounds for refusal is/are given for a category or group of goods or services, only general reasoning for all of the goods or services concerned may be used (15/02/2007, C239/05, The Kitchen Company, EU:C:2007:99, § 38). 
Kadar je (so) enak(-i) razlog(-i) za zavrnitev podan(-i) za kategorijo ali skupino blaga ali storitev, se lahko uporabi le splošna obrazložitev za vse blago ali storitve (15/02/2007, C239/05, The Kitchen Company, EU:C:2007:99, § 38).
As regards descriptiveness, an objection applies not only to those goods/services for which the term(s) making up the trade mark applied for is/are directly descriptive, but also to the broad category that (at least potentially) contains an identifiable subcategory or specific goods/services for which the mark applied for is directly descriptive. 
V zvezi z opisnostjo ugovor ne velja samo za blago ali storitve, ki jih neposredno opisuje(jo) izraz(-i), ki tvori(-jo) prijavljeno blagovno znamko, temveč tudi za širšo kategorijo, ki (vsaj potencialno) vsebuje določljivo podkategorijo ali določeno blago ali storitve, ki jih znamka neposredno opisuje.
In the absence of a suitable restriction by the applicant, the descriptiveness objection necessarily affects the broad category as such. 
Če prijavitelj ne uporabi primerne omejitve, ugovor glede opisnosti nujno vpliva na širšo kategorijo.
For example, ‘EUROHEALTH' is to be refused for ‘insurance' as a whole and not only for health insurance (07/06/2001, T359/99, EuroHealth, EU:T:2001:151, § 33). 
Na primer, „EUROHEALTH“ se zavrne za „zavarovanje“ kot celoto, in ne le za zdravstveno zavarovanje (07/06/2001, T359/99, EuroHealth, EU:T:2001:151, § 33).
An objection also applies for those goods and services that are directly linked to those for which the descriptive meaning pertains. 
Ugovor velja tudi za blago in storitve, ki so neposredno povezani z blagom in storitvami, na katere se nanaša opisni pomen.
Furthermore, if the descriptive meaning applies to an activity involving the use of several goods or services mentioned separately in the specification, then the objection applies for all of them (see judgment of 20/03/2002, T355/00, Tele Aid, EU:T:2002:79, for a number of goods and services offered in conjunction with, or applied in, remote assistance to car drivers). 
Če pa se opisni pomen nanaša na dejavnost, ki vključuje uporabo več vrst blaga ali storitev, navedenih ločeno v specifikaciji, ugovor velja za vse (glej sodbo z dne 20/03/2002, T355/00, Tele Aid, EU:T:2002:79, za vrsto blaga in storitev, ki se ponujajo v povezavi z zagotavljanjem pomoči na daljavo za voznike avtomobilov ali se uporabljajo pri zagotavljanju takšne pomoči).
It is possible to claim goods and services as what can be referred to as auxiliary goods or services in the sense that they are meant to be used with, or support the use of, the main goods or services. 
Za blago in storitve je mogoče trditi, da so tako imenovano pomožno blago ali storitve v smislu, da so namenjeni uporabi skupaj z glavnim blagom ali storitvami ali kot njihova podpora.
Typically, this covers paper and instruction manuals for the goods to which they belong or which are packed with them, advertisement and repair. 
To običajno vključuje papir, v katerega je blago zapakirano, navodila za uporabo blaga, na katerega se nanašajo, reklame in popravila.
In these cases, the auxiliary goods are by definition intended to be used and sold together with the main product (e.g. vehicles and instruction manuals). 
V teh primerih je pomožno blago glede na opredelitev namenjeno uporabi in prodaji skupaj z glavnim proizvodom (npr. vozila in navodila za uporabo).
It follows that if the EUTM is found to be descriptive of the main goods, logically it is also descriptive of the auxiliary goods, which are so closely related. 
Če se torej ugotovi, da blagovna znamka EU opisuje lastnosti glavnega blaga, je logično, da opisuje tudi lastnosti pomožnega blaga, saj sta obe vrsti blaga tesno povezani.
7 Timing of Objections 
Časovni okvir za ugovore
Objections should be raised as early as possible. 
Ugovore je treba vložiti čim prej.
In the majority of cases, the Office raises its objection ex officio before the publication of the EUTM application. 
Urad v večini primerov vloži ugovor po uradni dolžnosti pred objavo prijave blagovne znamke EU.
The Office can reopen the examination of absolute grounds on its own initiative at any time before registration (Article 45(3) EUTMR), and in particular, upon receiving observations from third parties relating to the existence of an absolute ground for refusal or following an interim decision from the Boards of Appeal proposing to re-examine the contested EUTM application on absolute grounds. 
Urad lahko kadar koli pred registracijo na svojo pobudo znova preizkusi absolutne razloge (člen 45(3) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU) in predvsem po prejemu pripomb tretjih oseb v zvezi z obstojem absolutnega razloga za zavrnitev ali po sprejetju vmesne odločbe odborov za pritožbe s predlogom za ponovni preizkus prijave blagovne znamke EU na podlagi absolutnih razlogov.
Observations from third parties must be submitted before the end of the opposition period or before the final decision on an opposition is taken when an opposition has been filed (Article 45(2) EUTMR). 
Pripombe tretjih oseb je treba predložiti pred iztekom roka za ugovor ali, če je bil ugovor že vložen, pred sprejetjem dokončne odločbe o ugovoru (člen 45(2) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU).
The Office can then decide to reopen the examination procedure as a result of these observations. 
Urad se lahko nato na podlagi teh pripomb odloči znova začeti postopek preizkušanja.
See the Guidelines, Part B, Examination, Section 1, Proceedings, paragraph 3.1. 
Glej Smernice, del B: Preizkušanje, razdelek 1: Postopek, odstavek 3.1.
In the case of international registrations designating the EU, the Office can raise an objection as long as the opposition period (one month after republication) has not started (Article 193(7) EUTMR) and any interim status declaration previously sent would be revoked. 
V primeru mednarodnih registracij, v katerih je imenovana EU, lahko Urad vloži ugovor, dokler ne začne teči rok za ugovor (en mesec po ponovni objavi) (člen 193(7) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU), vse morebitne predhodno poslane izjave o začasnem statusu pa se razveljavijo.
8 Disclaimers 
Odklonitve
The Office will assess disclaimers filed before the date of entry into force of the abovementioned regulation (23/03/2016) according to the former practice applicable. 
Urad odklonitve, vložene pred datumom začetka veljavnosti zgoraj navedene uredbe (23. marec 2016), presodi v skladu s prej veljavno prakso.
As a general rule, a disclaimer will not help to overcome an absolute grounds objection. 
Odklonitev načeloma ne prispeva k odpravi absolutnih razlogov za ugovor.
Where a trade mark consists of a combination of elements, each of which in itself is clearly not distinctive, there is no need for a disclaimer of the separate elements. 
Če je blagovna znamka sestavljena iz kombinacije elementov, za vsakega od katerih je jasno, da ni razlikovalen, ni potrebna odklonitev za posamezne elemente.
For example, if a periodical had as its trade mark ‘Alicante Local and International News' with a figurative distinctive element, the individual word elements within it would not need to be disclaimed. 
Na primer, če je ubeseditev „Alicante Local and International News“ blagovna znamka publikacije s figurativnim razlikovalnim elementom, ni treba odkloniti njenih posameznih besednih elementov.
If the applicant's disclaimer does not overcome the ground for refusing registration, the application must be refused to the extent that is required. 
Če odklonitev ne odpravi razloga za zavrnitev registracije, je treba prijavo zavrniti v zahtevanem obsegu.
Where the applicant has made a disclaimer of a non-distinctive element in its application, the disclaimer will stay even if the Office does not consider it necessary. 
Kadar prijavitelj v prijavi navede, da odklanja pravico do elementa, ki ni razlikovalen, odklonitev ostane veljavna tudi, če se Uradu to ne zdi potrebno.
Disclaimers of distinctive elements will be refused by the Office since they would result in a trade mark with an unclear scope of protection. 
Urad zavrne odklonitev pravice do razlikovalnih elementov, ker bi ta sicer povzročila nejasen obseg varstva znamke.
Sign Case number 
Znak Št. zadeve
The Court confirmed the refusal in respect of goods and services in Classes 16, 35, and 41 to 43 by means of general reasoning because of a sufficiently concrete and direct link for all these goods and services. 
Sodišče je potrdilo zavrnitev v zvezi z blagom in storitvami iz razredov 16 in 35 ter 41 do 43 s splošno obrazložitvijo zaradi dovolj konkretne in neposredne vezi med vsem blagom in storitvami.
For all of them, ‘BigXtra' will be perceived as indicating price reductions or other advantages (para. 48). 
BigXtra se za vse med njimi povezuje z znižanjem cen ali drugimi ugodnostmi (točka 48).
The General Court allowed general reasoning in respect of goods and services in Classes 7, 9, 11, 37 and 42 because the promotional meaning of the sign applied for would be perceived identically for each of them (paras 36-37). 
Splošno sodišče je dovolilo splošno obrazložitev v zvezi z blagom in storitvami iz razredov 7, 9, 11, 37 in 42, ker bi se promocijski pomen znaka, ki je naveden v prijavi, povezoval enako z vsakim izmed njih (točki 36 in 37).
Guidelines for Examination in the Office, Part B, Examination Page 8 
Smernice za preizkušanje v Uradu, del B, Preizkušanje Stran 1
Absolute Grounds for Refusal - EUTM Definition 
Absolutni razlogi za zavrnitev - Opredelitev blagovne znamke EU
CHAPTER 2 
POGLAVJE 2
EUTM DEFINITION 
OPREDELITEV BLAGOVNE ZNAMKE EU
1 General Remarks 3 
Kazalo1 Splošne opombe 3
2 ‘Non-traditional' Trade Marks and Article 7(1)(a) EUTMR 5 
2 „Netradicionalne“ blagovne znamke in člen 7(1)(a) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU 5
2.1 Shape marks 5 
2.1 Oblikovne znamke 5
2.2 Position marks 6 
2.2 Pozicijske znamke 5
2.3 Pattern marks 6 
2.3 Znamke z vzorcem 6
2.4 Colour marks 6 
2.4 Barvne znamke 6
2.5 Sound marks 8 
2.5 Zvočne znamke 8
2.6 Motion marks 9 
2.6 Znamke gibanja 9
2.7 Multimedia marks 13 
2.7 Multimedijske znamke 12
2.8 Hologram marks 13 
2.8 Holografske znamke 12
2.9 Other marks 13 
2.9 Druge znamke 12
2.9.1 Layout of a retail store 14 
2.9.1 Slikovna predstavitev ureditve trgovine na drobno 13
2.9.2 Smell/olfactory marks 14 
2.9.2 Znamke vonja 13
2.9.3 Taste marks 15 
2.9.3 Znamke okusa 14
2.9.4 Tactile marks 15 
2.9.4 Tipne znamke 14
3 Relationship with Other EUTMR Provisions 16 
3 Povezava z drugimi določbami Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU 15
1 General Remarks 
Splošne opombe
Article 7(1)(a) EUTMR reflects the Office's obligation to refuse signs that do not conform to the requirements of Article 4 EUTMR. 
Člen 7(1)(a) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU izraža obveznost Urada, da zavrne znake, ki niso skladni z zahtevami iz člena 4 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
As from 01/10/2017, according to Article 4 EUTMR, a European Union trade mark may consist of any signs, in particular words, including personal names, or designs, letters, numerals, colours, the shape of goods or of the packaging of goods, or sounds, provided that such signs are capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings and being represented on the Register of European Union trade marks (the Register) in a manner that enables the competent authorities and the public to determine the clear and precise subject matter of the protection afforded to its proprietor. 
V skladu s členom 4 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU je blagovna znamka Evropske unije od 1. oktobra 2017 lahko sestavljena iz kakršnih koli znakov, zlasti besed, vključno z osebnimi imeni, ali iz slik, črk, števil, barv, oblike blaga ali embalaže blaga ali zvokov, če se lahko s temi znaki blago ali storitve določenega podjetja razlikujejo od blaga ali storitev drugih podjetij ter se ti znaki v registru blagovnih znamk Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: register) lahko prikažejo tako, da lahko pristojni organi in javnost jasno in natančno ugotovijo, kaj je predmet varstva, ki je podeljeno njihovemu imetniku.
According to Article 39(2)(a) EUTMIR, ‘Title II [application procedure] shall not apply to applications for an EU trade mark entered before 01/10/2017, as well as to international registrations for which the designation of the Union was made before that date'. 
V skladu s členom 39(2)(a) Izvedbene uredbe se „naslov II [postopek prijave] [...] ne uporablja za prijave znamke EU, ki so bile vložene pred 1. oktobrom 2017, kot tudi ne za mednarodne registracije, za katere je bilo imenovanje Unije predloženo pred navedenim datumom“.
To be capable of constituting a trade mark for the purposes of Article 4 EUTMR, the subject matter of an application must satisfy three conditions: 
Predmet prijave mora izpolnjevati tri pogoje, da bi lahko pomenil blagovno znamko za namene člena 4 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU:
it must be a sign; 
biti mora znak;
it must be capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of others; 
z njim se blago ali storitve nekega podjetja razlikujejo od blaga ali storitev drugih podjetij;
it must be capable of being represented on the Register in a way that allows the competent authorities and the public to determine the clear and precise subject matter of protection. 
v registru se lahko prikaže tako, da lahko pristojni organi in javnost jasno in natančno ugotovijo, kaj je predmet varstva.
Signs 
Znaki
Article 4 EUTMR and Article 3(3) EUTMIR, read in conjunction, draw up a non-exhaustive list of signs that may constitute an EUTM: word marks, figurative marks, shape marks, position marks, pattern marks, single colour and combination of colour marks, sound marks, motion marks, multimedia marks, and hologram marks. 
Člen 4 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU v povezavi s členom 3(3) Izvedbene uredbe podaja neizčrpen seznam znakov, ki lahko pomenijo blagovno znamko EU: besedne znamke, figurativne znamke, oblikovne znamke, pozicijske znamke, znamke z vzorcem, enobarvne znamke in znamke iz kombinacije barv, zvočne znamke, znamke gibanja, multimedijske znamke in holografske znamke.
Where the mark does not fall within the definition of any of the specific types of marks listed in Article 3(3) EUTMIR, it can qualify as an ‘other' mark provided for by Article 3(4) EUTMIR, provided it complies with the representation requirements set out in Article (3)1 EUTMIR. 
Če znamka ni zajeta v nobeni opredelitvi posebnih vrst znamk iz člena 3(3) Izvedbene uredbe, se lahko šteje za „drugo“ znamko v skladu s členom 3(4) Izvedbene, če izpolnjuje zahteve za prikaz iz člena 3(1) Izvedbene uredbe.
Within this context, abstract concepts and ideas or general characteristics of goods are not specific enough to qualify as a sign, as they could apply to a variety of different manifestations (21/04/2010, T7/09, Spannfutter, EU:T:2010:153, § 25). 
V tem smislu abstraktni koncepti in zamisli ali splošne značilnosti blaga niso dovolj specifični, da bi lahko pomenili znak, saj bi lahko veljali za številne različne oblike (21/04/2010, T7/09, Spannfutter, EU:T:2010:153, § 25).
For this reason, the Court rejected, for example, an application for a ‘transparent collecting bin forming part of the external surface of a vacuum cleaner', as the subject matter was not a particular type of bin, but rather, in a general and abstract manner, all conceivable shapes of a transparent bin with a multitude of different appearances (25/01/2007, C321/03, Transparent bin, EU:C:2007:51, § 35, 37). 
Iz tega razloga je Sodišče na primer zavrnilo prijavo za „prozorno zbiralno posodo, ki je del zunanje površine sesalnika“, ker predmet ni bila določena vrsta posode, ampak na splošno in abstraktno vse oblike prozorne posode, ki si jih je mogoče zamisliti, z vrsto različnih videzov (25/01/2007, C321/03, Transparent bin, EU:C:2007:51, § 35, 37).
Distinguishing character 
Razlikovalni učinek
Article 4(a) EUTMR refers to the capacity of a sign to distinguish the goods of one undertaking from those of another. 
Člen 4(a) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU se nanaša na lastnost znaka, da razlikuje blago določenega podjetja od blaga drugih podjetij.
Unlike Article 7(1)(b) EUTMR, which concerns the distinctive character of a trade mark with regard to specific goods or services, Article 4 EUTMR is merely concerned with the abstract ability of a sign to serve as a badge of origin, regardless of the goods or services. 
V nasprotju s členom 7(1)(b) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, ki zadeva razlikovalni učinek blagovne znamke glede določenega blaga ali storitev, člen 4 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU obravnava le abstraktno sposobnost znaka, da služi kot označba izvora ne glede na blago ali storitve.
Only in very exceptional circumstances is it conceivable that a sign could not possess even the abstract capacity to distinguish the goods or services of one undertaking from those of another. 
Samo v zelo izjemnih okoliščinah je verjetno, da znak ne bi mogel imeti niti abstraktne sposobnosti razlikovanja blaga ali storitev določenega podjetja od blaga ali storitev drugega podjetja.
An example for the lack of abstract capacity in the context of any goods or services could be the word ‘Trademark'. 
Primer neobstoja abstraktne sposobnosti v okviru katerega koli blaga ali storitev bi lahko bil izraz „blagovna znamka“.
Representation on the Register 
Prikaz v registru
According to Article 4(b) EUTMR, the sign applied for needs to be capable of being represented on the Register, in a manner that enables the competent authorities and the public to determine the clear and precise subject matter of the protection afforded to its proprietor. 
V skladu s členom 4(b) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU mora biti mogoče, da se znak, za katerega se vloži prijava, v registru prikaže tako, da lahko pristojni organi in javnost jasno in natančno ugotovijo, kaj je predmet varstva, ki je podeljeno njegovemu imetniku.