natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Deception would nonetheless arise in the hypothetical case of a figurative mark containing the words MADE IN USA, filed by a company with its seat in the United States of America, being filed for a specifically limited list of goods - for example, clothing articles made in Vietnam - although, in practice, such cases seem unlikely to arise. 
Zavajajoča narava bi kljub temu nastala v hipotetičnem primeru, če bi bila figurativna znamka, ki vključuje besede MADE IN USA in bi jo vložila družba s sedežem v Združenih državah Amerike, vložena za posebno omejen seznam blaga - na primer kose oblačil, izdelanih v Vietnamu -, čeprav se takšni primeri v praksi zdijo malo verjetni.
The sign could evoke in the consumers' minds some impressions/expectations as to the geographical origin of the goods or of their designer that may not correspond to reality. 
Znak bi lahko pri potrošnikih vzbudil vtise/pričakovanja glede geografskega porekla blaga ali oblikovalca, ki morda ne ustrezajo stvarnosti.
For example, trade marks such as ALESSANDRO PERETTI or GIUSEPPE LANARO (invented examples) covering clothing or fashion goods in general may suggest to the relevant public that these goods are designed and produced by an Italian stylist, which may not be the case. 
Tako lahko na primer znamka, kot je ALESSANDRO PERETTI ali GIUSEPPE LANARO (izmišljena primera), ki zajema oblačila ali modne izdelke na splošno, upoštevno javnost prepriča, da je to blago oblikoval in ga izdeluje italijanski oblikovalec, kar morda ni res.
However, such a circumstance is not sufficient per se to render those marks misleading, wherever the goods originate from. 
Vendar takšne okoliščine same po sebi ne zadostujejo, da bi zaradi njih znamke postale zavajajoče, ne glede na to, od kod blago izvira.
Indeed, ‘when the sign is merely evocative there is no clear contrast between the impression/expectation a sign may evoke and the characteristics/qualities of the goods and services it covers. 
Kadar znak na nekaj le spominja, dejansko ni očitnega nasprotja med vtisom/pričakovanjem, ki ga lahko vzbudi znak, in značilnostmi/lastnostmi blaga in storitev, ki jih označuje.
4 Trade Marks Making Reference to ‘Official' Approval, Status or Recognition 
Blagovne znamke, ki se sklicujejo na „uradno odobritev“, status ali priznanje
It should be noted that, under the current practice of the Office, trade marks that could evoke official approval, status or recognition without giving the firm impression that the goods/services issue from, or are endorsed by, a public body or statutory organisation, are acceptable. 
Opozoriti je treba, da so v skladu s sedanjo prakso Urada blagovne znamke, ki bi lahko vzbujale vtis uradne odobritve, statusa ali priznanja, ne da bi bilo mogoče na njihovi podlagi z gotovostjo sklepati, da blago/storitve proizvaja/ponuja javni organ ali zakonsko določena organizacija oziroma da jih ta organ ali organizacija podpira, sprejemljive.
The following are two examples where the marks concerned, although allusive or suggestive, were not found to be deceptive. 
V naslednjih dveh primerih je bilo ugotovljeno, da zadevni znamki nista zavajajoči, čeprav namigujeta ali sugerirata.
5 Relation with Other EUTMR Provisions 
Razmerje z drugimi določbami Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU
The above explanations aim to define the scope of application of Article 7(1)(g) EUTMR. 
Namen zgornjih pojasnil je opredeliti področje uporabe člena 7(1)(g) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
Although addressed in their respective sections of the Guidelines, in the context of absolute grounds examination and of possible scenarios of deceit, the following provisions may be of particular relevance. 
Čeprav so naslednje določbe obravnavane v zadevnih razdelkih Smernic v okviru preizkušanja absolutnih razlogov in možnih scenarijev glede zavajanja, so lahko posebno pomembne.
5.1 Article 7(1)(b) and (c) EUTMR 
Člen 7(1)(b) in (c) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU
Under the current Office practice, if, following an objection based on descriptiveness and/or lack of distinctiveness, the EUTM applicant proposes a limitation in an attempt to overcome it, and provided the proposed limitation meets the prescribed requirements (a suitably worded unconditional request), the original list of goods and/or services will be limited accordingly. 
Sedanja praksa Urada je, da se prvotni seznam blaga in/ali storitev ustrezno omeji, če prijavitelj blagovne znamke EU po ugovoru zaradi opisne narave in/ali neobstoja razlikovalnega učinka predlaga omejitev za premostitev ugovora in če predlagana omejitev izpolnjuje predpisane zahteve (ustrezno oblikovan brezpogojni zahtevek).
However, if the limitation in question (albeit overcoming the initial objection) has the effect of rendering the trade mark applied for deceptive, then the examiner will have to raise an objection based on deception under Article 7(1)(g) EUTMR. 
Če pa blagovna znamka, za katero je vložena prijava, zaradi zadevne omejitve (čeprav je premostila prvotni ugovor) postane zavajajoča, mora preizkuševalec v skladu s členom 7(1)(g) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU vložiti ugovor zaradi zavajanja.
The following example illustrates such a scenario. 
Naslednji primer ponazarja takšen scenarij.
Initially, an objection under Article 7(1)(g) EUTMR was not appropriate, since the broad category ‘wines' also covers wines originating from Arcadia (and, since Arcadia, which identifies a wine-producing region in Greece, is not a protected geographical indication at European Union level, there is no obligation on the part of the applicant to restrict the specification only to wines originating from Arcadia). 
Ugovor na podlagi člena 7(1)(g) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU sprva ni bil ustrezen, saj široka kategorija „vino“ zajema tudi vino s poreklom iz Arkadije (ker Arkadija - ki označuje vinogradniško območje v Grčiji - ni zaščitena geografska označba na ravni Evropske unije, prijavitelju ni treba omejiti opredelitve le na vino s poreklom iz Arkadije).
The Office, however, objected under Article 7(1)(c) EUTMR because the trade mark was descriptive of the geographical origin of wines, to the extent that Arcadia is a Greek region known for its wine production. 
Vendar je Urad vložil ugovor na podlagi člena 7(1)(c) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, ker je blagovna znamka opisovala geografsko poreklo vina, saj je Arkadija grška regija, znana po proizvodnji vina.
The applicant subsequently offered to limit the specification of goods to exclude wines made in Greece or, if preferred, to include only wines produced in Italy. 
Prijavitelj se je nato ponudil, da omeji opredelitev blaga in izključi vino, proizvedeno v Grčiji, oziroma da - če bi se dala prednost tej možnosti - vključi le vino, proizvedeno v Italiji.
The Office held that the proposed limitation would render the trade mark deceptive under Article 7(1)(g) EUTMR, since it would convey false information as to the origin of the goods. 
Urad je menil, da bi znamka zaradi predlagane omejitve postala zavajajoča na podlagi člena 7(1)(g) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, saj bi posredovala neresnične informacije o poreklu blaga.
On appeal, the Board confirmed the refusal (27/03/2000, R 246/19991, ARCADIA, § 14). 
Odbor je v pritožbenem postopku potrdil zavrnitev (27/03/2000, R 246/19991, ARCADIA, § 14).
Sign and goods Reasoning Case No 
Znak in blago Utemeljitev Št. zadeve
It is clear that if the product being marketed under the sign ‘LACTOFREE' were actually lactose itself, then the mark would be clearly misleading. 
Jasno je, da bi bila znamka očitno zavajajoča, če bi bil proizvod, ki se trži pod znakom „LACTOFREE“, dejansko laktoza kot taka.
TITAN (German word for ‘titanium') for portable and relocatable buildings; modular portable building units for use in the construction of prefabricated relocatable buildings; prefabricated relocatable buildings constructed of modular portable building units, none of the aforesaid goods being made from or including titanium in Classes 6 and 19. 
TITAN (nemška beseda za titan) za prenosne in premične zgradbe; modularne prenosne stavbne enote za uporabo pri gradnji montažnih premičnih zgradb; montažne premične zgradbe, sestavljene iz modularnih prenosnih stavbnih enot, pri čemer nobena od zgoraj navedenih vrst blaga ni izdelana iz titana oziroma ne vsebuje titana iz razredov 6 in 19.
During the appeal proceedings the applicant, in an attempt to overcome an objection based on deception, offered to restrict the specifications in both classes by adding, at the end, the indication none of the aforesaid goods being made from or including titanium. 
Vložnik ugovora je v postopku ugovora, da bi poskusil premostiti ugovor, ki je temeljil na zavajanju, predlagal, do bo omejil opredelitve v obeh razredih in na konec dodal označbo, pri čemer nobena od zgoraj navedenih vrst blaga ni izdelana iz titana oziroma ne vsebuje titana.
The Board held that such a restriction, if accepted, would have had the effect of rendering the trade mark deceptive from the standpoint of the German-speaking public, as they would assume that the goods were made from titanium when in reality this is not the case. 
Odbor je menil, da bi takšna omejitev, če bi bila sprejeta, povzročila, da bi znamka postala zavajajoča pri nemško govoreči javnosti, saj bi ta lahko domnevala, da je blago izdelano iz titana, kar pa dejansko ne drži.
(Italian word for coffee) for tea, cocoa, artificial coffee in Class 30. 
(italijanska beseda za kavo) za čaj, kakav, kavni nadomestek iz razreda 30.
The Board confirmed the refusal. 
Odbor je potrdil zavrnitev.
It considered that the consumer would falsely believe that the tea, cocoa, artificial coffee offered by the applicant contained coffee. 
Po mnenju odbora bi potrošnik napačno menil, da čaj, kakav in kavni nadomestek, ki jih nudi prijavitelj, vsebujejo kavo.
The mark would give the consumer false information about the ingredients of the goods and for that reason was deceptive. 
Znamka bi potrošniku dala napačno informacijo o sestavinah blaga in je zato bila zavajajoča.
for, inter alia, poultry in Class 29. 
med drugim za perutnino iz razreda 29.
‘Gallina' means ‘chicken' in Spanish. 
„Gallina“ pomeni „piščanec“ v španščini.
The specification is sufficiently broad to include chicken. 
Specifikacija je dovolj široka, da vključuje piščance.
There is no specific reference in the sign, which indeed would qualify for an objection under Article 7(1)(g) EUTMR. 
V znaki ni nobenega posebnega sklicevanja, zaradi katerega bi bilo mogoče vložiti ugovor na podlagi člena 7(1)(g) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
EUTM No 419 507 
Blagovna znamka EU št.
for, inter alia, Class 29: Meat, fish, poultry and game; meat extracts; eggs; milk and milk products; dairy products including cheese; edible oils and fats including butter; flavoured milk beverages. 
med drugim za razred 29: meso, ribe, perutnina in divjačina; mesni ekstrakti; jajca; mleko in mlečni proizvodi; mlečni proizvodi, vključno s siri; olja za prehrano in maščobe, vključno z maslom; aromatizirani mlečni napitki.
Meat in Class 29 also covers beef, which is depicted in the sign, meaning that non-deceptive use is possible. 
Meso iz razreda 29 zajema tudi govedino, ki je prikazana v znaku, kar pomeni, da je možna nezavajajoča uporaba.
The sign does not, therefore, give rise to an objection under Article 7(1)(g) EUTMR. 
Znak torej ni razlog za ugovor na podlagi člena 7(1)(g) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
For fish and poultry, inter alia, the sign is also not objectionable under Article 7(1)(g) EUTMR. 
Na podlagi člena 7(1)(g) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU znak med drugim ni sporen niti za ribe in perutnino.
They are sufficiently different from beef to avoid deception. 
Oba izraza se dovolj razlikujeta od govedine, da zavajanje ni mogoče.
This will not only be noticed when the goods are purchased over the counter but also when they are offered on shelves in supermarkets where they are normally displayed in transparent packaging. 
To ni opazno samo pri blagu, ki se kupuje pri prodajnem pultu, temveč tudi, kadar je v ponudbi na policah supermarketov, kjer je običajno na voljo v prozorni embalaži.
Sign and services Reasoning Case No 
Znak in storitve Utemeljitev Št. zadeve
THE E-COMMERCE AUTHORITY for business services, namely, providing rankings of and other information regarding electronic commerce vendors, goods and services via the Internet in Class 35 and providing research and advisory services and information in the area of electronic commerce in Class 42. 
THE E-COMMERCE AUTHORITY za poslovne storitve, in sicer zagotavljanje razvrstitev in drugih informacij o prodajalcih, blagu in storitvah elektronskega poslovanja prek spleta iz razreda 35 ter zagotavljanje raziskovalnih in svetovalnih storitev ter informacij na področju elektronskega poslovanja iz razreda 42.
The Board found that the trade mark was not deceptive, as it did not convey the firm impression that the services issue from a governmental or statutory organisation. 
Odbor je menil, da znamka ni zavajajoča, saj ne daje trdnega vtisa, da storitve izhajajo iz vladne ali zakonsko določene organizacije.
(The Board, however, confirmed the refusal under Article 7(1)(b) EUTMR on the grounds that the mark lacked distinctive character, as it would be perceived by the English-speaking public merely as a simple statement of self-promotion that makes a claim about the level of competence of the service providers.) 11/07/2001, R 803/20001 
(Vendar je odbor potrdil zavrnitev na podlagi člena 7(1)(b) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU z obrazložitvijo, da znamka nima razlikovalnega učinka, saj bi jo angleško govoreča javnost dojemala le kot preprosto samopromocijsko trditev, ki se sklicuje na raven usposobljenosti ponudnikov storitev.) 11/07/2001, R 803/20001
for, inter alia, teaching of skiing in Class 41. 
med drugim za storitve poučevanja za smučanje iz razreda 41.
The Board held that French consumers would understand that the trade mark alludes to the fact that the services are supplied in France by a French teaching centre, and relate to learning how to ski ‘in the French way'. 
Po mnenju odbora naj bi francoski potrošniki razumeli, da znamka namiguje na to, da se storitve zagotavljajo v Franciji, saj naj bi jih izvajal francoski učni center, nanašale pa naj bi se na učenje smučanja po francosko.
Furthermore, the French public had no reason to believe that, simply because of the presence of its tricolour logo (not a reproduction of the French flag), that the services are supplied by public authorities or even authorised by such authorities. 
Poleg tega francoska javnost nima razloga, da bi le zaradi svojega tribarvnega logotipa (ki ni prikaz francoske zastave) verjela, da te storitve zagotavljajo javni organi oziroma da so jih takšni organi odobrili.
11/07/2001, R 235/20091; confirmed 05/05/2011, T41/10, EU:T:2011:200 
11/07/2001, R 235/20091, potrjena 05/05/2011, T41/10, EU:T:2011:200
Guidelines for Examination in the Office, Part B, Examination Page 5 
Smernice za preizkušanje v Uradu, del B, Preizkušanje stran 1
Absolute Grounds for Refusal - Trade Marks in Conflict with Flags and Other Symbols 
Absolutni razlogi za zavrnitev - Blagovne znamke, ki sovpadajo z zastavami in drugimi simboli
CHAPTER 9 
POGLAVJE 9
TRADE MARKS IN CONFLICT WITH FLAGS AND OTHER SYMBOLS 
BLAGOVNE ZNAMKE, KI SOVPADAJO Z ZASTAVAMI IN DRUGIMI SIMBOLI
(ARTICLE 7(1)(h) and (i) EUTMR) 
(ČLEN 7(1)(h) in (i) UREDBE O BLAGOVNI ZNAMKI EU)
2 Article 7(1)(h) EUTMR 3 
2 Člen 7(1)(h) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU 3
2.1 Objective of Article 7(1)(h) EUTMR 3 
2.1 Cilj člena 7(1)(h) Uredbe o znamki EU 3
2.2 Relevant emblems and signs protected 3 
2.2 Varstvo zadevnih emblemov in znakov 3
3 Article 7(1)(i) EUTMR - emblems not protected under Article 6ter PC 14 
3 Člen 7(1)(i) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU - Emblemi, ki niso zaščiteni na podlagi člena 6ter Pariške konvencije 14
3.1 Objective of Article 7(1)(i) EUTMR 14 
3.1 Cilj člena 7(1)(i) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU 14
3.2 Protected symbols 15 
3.2 Zaščiteni simboli 15
4 Exceptions 17 
4 Izjeme 17
Article 7(1)(h) EUTMR incorporates Article 6ter of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (PC) into the European Union trade mark system. 
Člen 7(1)(h) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU vključuje člen 6ter Pariške konvencije za zaščito industrijske lastnine v sistem blagovnih znamk Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Pariška konvencija).
It therefore protects armorial bearings, flags and other state emblems of states that are party to the PC, as well as official signs and hallmarks indicating control and warranty adopted by them. 
S tem zagotavlja varstvo za grbe, zastave in druge državne embleme držav članic Pariške konvencije ter uradne znake in žige, ki so znak kontrole in garancije in so jih te države sprejele.
This protection was extended to armorial bearings, flags, other emblems, abbreviations and names of intergovernmental organisations (IGOs) in 1958. 
To varstvo od leta 1958 zajema tudi grbe, zastave, druge embleme, kratice in imena medvladnih organizacij.
Article 7(1)(h) EUTMR applies only if the sign applied for is identical to a protected ‘emblem' or is a heraldic imitation of such an ‘emblem'. 
Člen 7(1)(h) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU se uporablja samo, če je znak, za katerega je vložena prijava, enak zaščitenemu emblemu, ali če gre za heraldično imitacijo takega emblema.
Article 7(1)(i) EUTMR protects badges, emblems and escutcheons that are not protected under Article 6ter PC but are of public interest. 
S členom 7(1)(i) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU so zaščitena znamenja, emblemi in grbi, ki niso zajeti v členu 6ter Pariške konvencije, imajo pa javni pomen.
2 Article 7(1)(h) EUTMR 
Člen 7(1)(h) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU
2.1 Objective of Article 7(1)(h) EUTMR 
Cilj člena 7(1)(h) Uredbe o znamki EU
The objective of Article 6ter PC is to exclude the registration and use of trade marks that are identical or notably similar to state emblems, official signs and hallmarks indicating control and warranty adopted by the states or the emblems, abbreviations and names of IGOs. 
Cilj člena 6ter Pariške konvencije je izključiti registracijo in uporabo blagovnih znamk, ki so enake ali izrazito podobne državnim emblemom, uradnim znakom in žigom, ki so znak kontrole in garancije in so sprejeti v državah, ter emblemom, kraticam in imenom medvladnih organizacij.
Such registration or use would adversely affect the right of the authority concerned to control the use of the symbols of its sovereignty, and might, moreover, mislead the public as to the origin of the goods and services for which these marks are used. 
Takšna registracija ali uporaba bi kršila pravico zadevnega organa do nadzora nad uporabo simbolov njene suverenosti in bi lahko poleg tega zavajala javnost glede izvora blaga in storitev, za katere se te znamke uporabljajo.
Registration of these emblems and signs, as well as any imitation from a heraldic point of view, either as a trade mark or as an element thereof, must be refused if no authorisation has been granted by the competent authority. 
Če pristojni organ ne izda odobritve, je treba registracijo teh emblemov in znakov ter vsake imitacije s heraldičnega vidika, bodisi v obliki blagovne znamke ali njenega elementa, zavrniti.
Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) enjoy the same protection pursuant to Article 2(1) TRIPS, according to which members of the WTO must comply with Articles 1 to 12 and 19 PC. 
Članice Svetovne trgovinske organizacije (STO) uživajo enako varstvo v skladu s členom 2(1) Sporazuma o trgovinskih vidikih pravic intelektualne lastnine (TRIPS), ki določa, da morajo članice organizacije STO spoštovati člene 1-12 in 19 Pariške konvencije.
2.2 Relevant emblems and signs protected 
Varstvo zadevnih emblemov in znakov
A state flag is defined by the constitution of a state or by a specific law of that state. 
Državna zastava je opredeljena v ustavi države ali posebnem zakonu te države.
Normally, a state will have only one state flag. 
Država ima običajno samo eno državno zastavo.
For instance, the Spanish flag is defined in Article 4 of the Spanish Constitution; the French flag is defined in Article 2 of the French Constitution; and the German flag is defined in Article 22 of the German Constitution. 
Na primer, španska zastava je opredeljena v členu 4 španske ustave, francoska zastava je opredeljena v členu 2 francoske ustave, nemška zastava pa v členu 22 nemške ustave.
State flags enjoy protection per se without any need for registration at WIPO pursuant to Article 6ter(3)(a) PC. 
Državne zastave uživajo varstvo kot take, ne da bi jih bilo treba registrirati pri organizaciji WIPO v skladu s členom 6ter(3)(a) Pariške konvencije.
There is no need to establish any link between the goods and services applied for and the country; state flags enjoy absolute protection. 
Ni treba vzpostaviti nobene povezave med blagom in storitvami, za katere je bila vložena prijava, ter državo: državne zastave uživajo popolno varstvo.
Armorial bearings, flags, and other state emblems 
Grbi, zastave in drugi državni emblemi
Armorial bearings normally consist of a design or image depicted on a shield. 
Grbi so običajno sestavljeni iz slike ali podobe, naslikane na ščitu.
An example of an armorial bearing is the coat of arms of Spain. 
Primer grba je grb Španije.
Apart from the state flag (protected per se), a member state of the PC may also request protection for other flags, namely those of its first political division in a federal state. 
Država članica Pariške konvencije lahko poleg za državno zastavo (ki je zaščitena kot taka) zaprosi tudi za varstvo za druge zastave, tj. zastave svoje prve politične delitve na zvezne dežele.
For instance, Germany has requested protection for the flags of each Bundesland (‘federal state'). 
Nemčija je na primer zaprosila za varstvo zastav vsake posamezne zvezne dežele (Bundesland).
In contrast, Spain has not requested protection for the flag of the Comunidades Autónomas (Autonomous Communities), only for the state flag and the state flag with the coat of arms. 
Španija pa, nasprotno, ni zaprosila za varstvo zastav avtonomnih skupnosti (Comunidades Autónomas), temveč samo za državno zastavo in državno zastavo z grbom.
France and the United Kingdom are examples of states that have not requested protection for any flag. 
Francija in Združeno kraljestvo sta primera držav, ki niso zaprosile za varstvo za nobeno zastavo.
The expression ‘other state emblems' indicates any emblems constituting the symbol of the sovereignty of a state. 
Izraz „drugi državni emblemi“ pomeni vse embleme, ki ponazarjajo simbol suverenosti države.
This might be a representation of the national crown, 
To je lahko prikaz nacionalne krone.
or the official seal of a member state of the PC, 
ali uradnega žiga države članice Pariške konvencije.
Like state flags, armorial bearings, flags, and other state emblems enjoy absolute protection, irrespective of the goods and services applied for. 
Grbi, zastave in drugi državni emblemi podobno kot državne zastave uživajo popolno varstvo ne glede na blago in storitve, za katere je bila vložena prijava.
Official signs and hallmarks indicating control and warranty 
Uradni znaki ali žigi, ki so znak kontrole in garancije
The purpose of official signs and hallmarks indicating control and warranty is to certify that a state or an organisation duly appointed by a state for that purpose has checked that certain goods meet specific standards or are of a given level of quality. 
Namen uradnih znakov in žigov, ki so znak kontrole in garancije, je potrditi, da je neka država ali organizacija, ki jo je v ta namen ustrezno imenovala država, preverila, da nekatero blago izpolnjuje posebne standarde ali ustreza zadevni ravni kakovosti.
These symbols are normally registered at WIPO for specific products and services, such as: 
Ti simboli so običajno registrirani pri organizaciji WIPO za posebne proizvode in storitve, kot so:
Other typical examples are signs of warranty for metals, such as: 
Drugi značilni elementi so znaki garancije za kovine, kot so: