natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The evidence submitted must show that the online transactions were connected with the goods or services designated by the mark. 
Iz predloženih dokazov mora biti razvidno, da so bile spletne transakcije povezane z blagom ali storitvami, označenimi z znamko.
Whereas the nature of the mark and, to a certain extent, the time (as seen above) and place are less complex elements to prove, the extent of use presents more difficulties if only evidence of internet use is provided. 
Narava blagovne znamke ter deloma tudi čas (kot je razvidno zgoraj) in kraj so manj zapleteni elementi za dokazovanje, veliko težje pa je dokazati obseg uporabe, če so zagotovljeni le dokazi o spletni uporabi.
2.4 Place of use 
Kraj uporabe
2.4.1 Use on the ‘domestic' market 
Uporaba na domačem trgu
Trade marks must be used in the territory where they are protected (European Union for EUTMs, the territory of the Member State for national marks or Benelux for Benelux marks, and the territories of the relevant countries for international registrations). 
Blagovne znamke je treba uporabljati na ozemlju, kjer so zaščitene (ta so Evropska unija za blagovne znamke EU, ozemlje države članice za nacionalne znamke ali ozemlje Beneluksa za znamke Beneluksa in ozemlja ustreznih držav za mednarodne registracije).
As the Court held in para. 30 of Leno Merken, its judgment of 19/12/2012, C149/11, Onel / Omel, EU:C:2012:816, ‘the territorial scope of the use is only one of several factors to be taken into account in the determination of whether that use is genuine or not'. 
Kot je Sodišče menilo v točki 30 sodbe v zadevi Leno Merken (19/12/2012, C149/11, Onel / Omel, EU:C:2012:816), je „ozemeljski obseg uporabe le eden od dejavnikov, ki jih je treba upoštevati pri ugotavljanju, ali je ta uporaba resna in dejanska“.
The Court further indicated that use of the mark in non-EU territories cannot be taken into account (para. 38). 
Sodišče je poleg tega navedlo, da ni mogoče upoštevati uporabe te blagovne znamke v državah, ki niso članice EU (točka 38).
In view of the globalisation of trade, an indication of the registered seat of the owner of the mark may not be regarded as sufficient indication that the use has taken place in that particular country. 
Navedba registriranega sedeža imetnika znamke se zaradi globalizacije trgovine morda ne upošteva kot zadosten dokaz, da je uporaba potekala v zadevni državi.
Even though Article 18(1)(b) EUTMR stipulates that the affixing of the trade mark to goods or to the packaging thereof in the European Union solely for export purposes is considered as use of the mark, mere indication of the opponent's seat as such does not constitute evidence of such acts. 
Čeprav člen 18(1)(b) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU določa, da se namestitev blagovne znamke EU na blago ali njegovo embalažo v Evropski uniji zgolj za potrebe izvoza upošteva kot uporaba znamke, le navedba sedeža vložnika ugovora ni dokaz o takšnih dejavnostih.
On the other hand, the fact that clients that have their seats outside the relevant territory are listed in the documents for proving use of the earlier mark is in itself not sufficient to rule out that services (e.g. promotion services) may actually have been rendered in the relevant territory for the benefit of these companies located in other territories (09/06/2010, R 952/20091, GLOBAL (fig.) / GLOBAL TABACOS (fig.), § 16). 
Po drugi strani le dejstvo, da so stranke, ki imajo sedež zunaj upoštevnega ozemlja, navedene v dokumentih za dokazovanje uporabe prejšnje znamke, ni dovolj za izključitev, da so bile morda na upoštevnem ozemlju dejansko opravljene storitve (npr. promocijske storitve) v korist teh podjetij, ki imajo sedež na drugih ozemljih (09/06/2010, R 952/20091, GLOBAL (fig.) / GLOBAL TABACOS (fig.), § 16).
2.4.2 EUTMs: use in the European Union 
Blagovne znamke EU: uporaba v Evropski uniji
If the earlier mark is a European Union mark, it must be used ‘in the Union' (Articles 18(1) and 47(2) EUTMR). 
Če je prejšnja znamka blagovna znamka Evropske unije, jo je treba uporabljati v Uniji (člen 18(1) in člen 47(2) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU).
Following Leno Merken, Article 18(1) EUTMR must be interpreted as meaning that the territorial borders of the Member States should be disregarded when assessing whether an EUTM has been put to ‘genuine use' in the European Union (para. 44). 
V skladu s sodbo v zadevi Leno Merken je treba člen 18(1) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU razlagati tako, da se pri presoji, ali se blagovna znamka EU resno in dejansko uporablja v Evropski uniji, ne upoštevajo meje ozemlja držav članic (točka 44).
In territorial terms and in view of the unitary character of the EUTM, the appropriate approach is not that of political boundaries but of market(s). 
V smislu ozemlja in zaradi enotne narave blagovne znamke EU se ustrezni pristop nanaša na trg(-e), ne na politične meje.
Moreover, one of the aims pursued by the EUTM system is to be open to businesses of all kinds and sizes. 
Poleg tega je eden od ciljev sistema blagovne znamke EU ta, da je sistem odprt za podjetja vseh vrst in velikosti.
Therefore, the size of an undertaking is not a relevant factor for establishing genuine use. 
Zato velikost podjetja ni upoštevni dejavnik za ugotovitev resne in dejanske uporabe.
As the Court indicated in Leno Merken, it is impossible to determine a priori and in the abstract what territorial scope should be applied in order to determine whether the use of the mark is genuine or not (para. 55). 
Kot je Sodišče navedlo v sodbi v zadevi Leno Merken, ni mogoče vnaprej abstraktno določiti, kolikšen ozemeljski obseg je treba doseči, da bi se lahko uporaba zadevne blagovne znamke štela za resno in dejansko (točka 55).
All the relevant facts and circumstances must be taken into account, including the characteristics of the market concerned, the nature of the goods or services protected by the trade mark and the territorial extent and scale of the use as well as its frequency and regularity (para. 58). 
Upoštevati je treba vsa zadevna dejstva in okoliščine, vključno z značilnostmi zadevnega trga, naravo blaga ali storitev, zaščitenih z blagovno znamko, ozemeljskim in količinskim obsegom uporabe ter pogostostjo in rednostjo uporabe (točka 58).
Use of an EUTM in the UK (15/07/2015, T398/13, TVR ITALIA (fig.) / TVR et al., EU:T:2015:503, § 57) or even in London and its immediate surroundings may be geographically sufficient (30/01/2015, T278/13, now, EU:T:2015:57). 
Uporaba blagovne znamke EU v Združenem kraljestvu (15/07/2015, T398/13, TVR ITALIA (fig.) / TVR et al., EU:T:2015:503, § 57) ali celo v Londonu in njegovi neposredni okolici lahko geografsko zadošča (30/01/2015, T278/13, now, EU:T:2015:57).
The Board of Appeal decision of 07/03/2013, R 234/20122, now (fig.) (confirmed 30/01/2015, T278/13, now, EU:T:2015:57), considered the use of an EUTM for wireless broadband services in Class 42 in the geographical area comprising London and the Thames Valley sufficient to constitute genuine use in the United Kingdom and also in the European Union, taking into account the territorial extent [London being ‘the largest city in the United Kingdom and the largest urban zone in the European Union', having ‘a metropolitan area … with an estimated total population of between 12 million and 14 million people', being ‘the world's leading financial centre along with New York', ‘a leading centre of arts, science, tourism and media and information technology', and having a profile on the European commercial scene ‘disproportionately high in respect to the services in question' (R 234/20122, para. 47), and the Thames Valley being ‘200 miles long and 30 miles wide' and including ‘populous towns and cities of significant economic activity' (R 234/20122, para. 4546)], the scale, frequency and regularity of use and the characteristics of the market concerned (R 234/20122, para. 52). 
V odločbi odbora za pritožbe 07/03/2013, R 234/20122, now (fig.) (potrjena 30/01/2015, T278/13, now, EU:T:2015:57), se je štelo, da uporaba blagovne znamke EU za brezžične širokopasovne storitve iz razreda 42 na geografskem območju, ki zajema London in regijo Thames Valley, zadostuje za ugotovitev resne in dejanske uporabe v Združenem kraljestvu in v Evropski uniji, in sicer ob upoštevanju ozemeljskega obsega [London je največje mesto v Združenem kraljestvu in največje urbano območje v Evropski uniji, ki ima velemestno območje […], na katerem po ocenah živi med 12 in 14 milijonov prebivalcev, je poleg New Yorka najpomembnejše svetovno finančno središče, vodilno umetniško, znanstveno, turistično, medijsko in informacijsko-tehnološko središče in ima v zvezi z zadevnimi storitvami nesorazmerno velik delež v evropskem poslovnem okolju (R 234/20122, para. 47), pri čemer je regija Thames Valley dolga 200 milj in široka 30 milj ter zajema gosto naseljena mesta velikega gospodarskega pomena (R 234/20122, para. 45 in 46)], obsega, pogostnosti in rednosti uporabe ter značilnosti zadevnega trga (R 234/20122, para. 52).
The Office must determine on a case-by-case basis whether the various indications and evidence can be combined for the purpose of assessing the genuine character of use, the geographical dimension of which is only one of the aspects to be considered. 
Urad mora za vsak primer posebej opredeliti, ali je mogoče združiti različne podatke in dokaze za presojo resne in dejanske uporabe, pri čemer je geografska razsežnost le eden od vidikov, ki jih je treba upoštevati.
In any event, it must be underlined that the European requirements or standards for genuine use are applicable (i.e. the conditions of Article 18 EUTMR) and not national standards or practices applied to EUTMs. 
Vsekakor je treba poudariti, da se uporabljajo evropske zahteve ali standardi za resno in dejansko uporabo (tj. pogoji iz člena 18 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU), ne pa nacionalni standardi ali prakse, ki se uporabljajo za blagovne znamke EU.
2.4.3 National marks: use in the relevant Member State 
Nacionalne blagovne znamke: uporaba v upoštevni državi članici
If the earlier mark is a national mark with effect in one of the Member States of the European Union, the mark must have been genuinely used in the country where it is protected (Article 47(3) EUTMR). 
Če je prejšnja znamka nacionalna znamka z učinkom v eni od držav članic Evropske unije, jo je bilo treba resno in dejansko uporabljati v državi, v kateri je varovana (člen 47(3) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU).
Use in a part of the Member State, provided it is genuine, may be considered sufficient: 
Uporaba v delu države članice se lahko upošteva kot zadostna, če je resna in dejanska.
If the earlier mark is an international mark or a Benelux mark, the mark must have been genuinely used in the territory of the relevant countries of the international registration or in Benelux, respectively. 
Če je prejšnja znamka mednarodna znamka ali znamka Beneluksa, se je morala resno in dejansko uporabljati na ozemlju zadevnih držav mednarodne registracije oziroma v Beneluksu.
2.4.4 Use in the import and export trade 
Uporaba pri uvozu in izvozu
According to Article 18(1)(b) EUTMR, the affixing of the European Union trade mark to goods or to the packaging thereof in the European Union solely for export purposes also constitutes use within the meaning of Article 18(1) EUTMR. 
V skladu s členom 18(1)(b) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU se za uporabo v smislu člena 18(1) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU šteje tudi namestitev blagovne znamke Evropske unije na blago ali njegovo embalažo v Evropski uniji izključno za potrebe izvoza.
The mark has to be used (i.e. affixed to goods or their packaging) in the relevant market - that is, the geographical area where it is registered. 
Znamka se mora uporabljati (tj. biti nameščena na blago ali njegovo embalažo) na upoštevnem trgu, tj. geografskem območju, kjer je registrirana.
Evidence relating only to the import of the goods in the relevant area may, depending on the circumstances of the case, suffice as proof of use in this area (see by analogy 09/07/2010, T430/08, Grain Millers, EU:T:2010:304, § 33, 40 et seq. regarding proof of use in the course of trade of a sign, on the basis of imports from Romania to Germany). 
Dokazi, ki se nanašajo le na uvoz blaga na upoštevnem območju, lahko glede na okoliščine zadeve zadostujejo za dokaz o uporabi na tem območju (glej po analogiji sodbo 09/07/2010, T430/08, Grain Millers, EU:T:2010:304, § 33, 40 et seq., v zvezi z dokazom o uporabi znaka v gospodarskem prometu na podlagi uvoza iz Romunije v Nemčijo).
The Court has held that transit, which consists in transporting goods lawfully manufactured in a Member State to a non-member country by passing through one or more Member States, does not involve any marketing of the goods in question and is therefore not liable to infringe the specific subject matter of the trade mark (regarding the transit through France of goods originating in Spain and destined for Poland, see judgments of 23/10/2003, C115/02, Rioglass and Transremar, EU:C:2003:587, § 27; 09/11/2006, C281/05, Diesel, EU:C:2006:709, § 19). 
Sodišče je odločilo, da tranzit, ki zajema prevoz blaga, zakonito proizvedenega v državi članici, v tretjo državo skozi eno ali več držav članic, ne vključuje trženja zadevnega blaga in da zato ne more kršiti posebnega predmeta blagovne znamke (v zvezi s tranzitom blaga skozi Francijo, ki je izviralo iz Španije in je bilo namenjeno na Poljsko, glej sodbi 23/10/2003, C115/02, Rioglass and Transremar, EU:C:2003:587, § 27; 09/11/2006, C281/05, Diesel, EU:C:2006:709, § 19).
Therefore, mere transit through a Member State cannot constitute genuine use of the earlier mark in that territory (09/12/2015, T354/14, ZuMEX (fig.) / JUMEX, EU:T:2015:947, § 62). 
Zato le tranzit skozi državo članico ne more pomeniti resne in dejanske uporabe prejšnje znamke na navedenem ozemlju (09/12/2015, T354/14, ZuMEX (fig.) / JUMEX, EU:T:2015:947, § 62.
2.5 Time of use 
Čas uporabe
2.5.1 Oppositions filed on or after 23/03/2016 
Ugovori, vloženi 23. marca 2016 ali po tem datumu
If the earlier mark is subject to the use requirement at all (registered for not less than 5 years), the actual period for which use must be shown can simply be computed backwards from the filing or, if the contested EUTM application has a priority date, from the priority date of the contested EUTM application. 
Če za prejšnjo znamko sploh velja zahteva glede uporabe (registrirana najmanj pet let), se lahko dejansko obdobje, za katero mora biti dokazana uporaba, preprosto izračuna s štetjem nazaj od datuma vložitve ali, če ima izpodbijana prijava blagovne znamke EU datum prednostne pravice, od datuma prednostne pravice izpodbijane prijave blagovne znamke EU.
For example, if the contested EUTM application was filed on 15/06/2016, or if this date was the priority date of the contested EUTM application, the opponent would have to prove genuine use of its mark within the period from 15/06/2011 to 14/06/2016. 
Na primer, če bi bila izpodbijana prijava blagovne znamke EU vložena 15. junija 2016 ali če je ta datum datum prednostne pravice izpodbijane prijave blagovne znamke EU, bi moral vložnik ugovora dokazati resno in dejansko uporabo svoje blagovne znamke v obdobju od 15. junija 2011 do 14. junija 2016.
If the contested mark is an international registration designating the European Union, the actual period for which use must be proven can simply be computed backwards from the date of registration (INID code 151) or the date of priority (INID code 300), or, as the case may be, the date of subsequent designation of the European Union (INID code 891). 
Če je izpodbijana znamka mednarodna registracija, v kateri je imenovana Evropska unija, se lahko dejansko obdobje, za katero je treba dokazati uporabo, preprosto izračuna s štetjem nazaj od datuma registracije (koda INID 151) ali datuma prednostne pravice (koda INID 300) oziroma datuma naknadnega imenovanja Evropske unije (koda INID 891).
For example, if the contested international registration were registered, or if the European Union were subsequently designated, on 15/06/2016, the opponent would have to prove genuine use of its mark within the period from 15/06/2011 to 14/06/2016. 
Na primer, če bi bila izpodbijana mednarodna registracija registrirana oziroma če bi bila Evropska unija naknadno imenovana 15. junija 2016, bi moral vložnik ugovora dokazati resno in dejansko uporabo svoje blagovne znamke v obdobju od 15. junija 2011 do 14. junija 2016.
Evidence referring to use made outside the relevant time frame is in general immaterial, unless it constitutes conclusive indirect proof that the mark must have also been put to genuine use during the relevant period. 
Dokazi o uporabi zunaj zadevnega časovnega okvira so na splošno brezpredmetni, razen če so prepričljiv posredni dokaz, da se je znamka resno in dejansko uporabljala tudi v zadevnem obdobju.
The Court held in this context that circumstances subsequent to the relevant point of time may make it possible to confirm or better assess the extent to which the trade mark was used during the relevant period and the real intentions of the proprietor during that time (27/01/2004, C259/02, Laboratoire de la mer, EU:C:2004:50, § 31). 
Sodišče je v zvezi s tem odločilo, da lahko okoliščine, ki nastanejo po upoštevnem trenutku, omogočajo, da se potrdijo ali bolje presodijo obseg uporabe blagovne znamke v upoštevnem obdobju in resnične namere imetnika v navedenem obdobju (27/01/2004, C259/02, Laboratoire de la mer, EU:C:2004:50, § 31).
Where a mark has not been genuinely used for more than 5 years before the filing or priority date of the contested EUTM application, the fact that there may be remaining goodwill or knowledge of the mark in the mind of the trade or customers does not ‘save' the mark. 
Če se znamka ni resno in dejansko uporabljala več kot pet let pred datumom vložitve ali datumom prednostne pravice izpodbijane blagovne znamke EU, dejstvo, da morda še vedno obstaja dobro ime ali poznavanje znamke v zadevni dejavnosti ali med strankami, ne bo rešilo znamke.
The use need not have been made throughout the period of 5 years, but rather within the 5 years. 
Blagovne znamke ni bilo treba uporabljati v celotnem petletnem obdobju, temveč jo je bilo treba uporabljati v tem obdobju.
The provisions on the use requirement do not require continuous use (16/12/2008, T86/07, Deitech, EU:T:2008:577, § 52). 
Določbe o zahtevi glede uporabe ne zahtevajo stalne uporabe (16/12/2008, T86/07, Deitech, EU:T:2008:577, § 52).
2.5.2 Oppositions filed before 23/03/2016 
Ugovori, vloženi pred 23. marcem 2016
Before the entry into force of the Amending Regulation, the 5-year period was computed backwards from the date of publication of the contested EUTM application. 
Pred začetkom veljavnosti Uredbe (EU) 2015/2424 o spremembi se je petletno obdobje izračunalo s štetjem nazaj od datuma, ko je bila objavljena izpodbijana prijava blagovne znamke EU.
2.6 Extent of use 
Obseg uporabe
2.6.1 Criteria 
Merila
In this regard, it has to be evaluated whether, in view of the market situation in the particular industry or trade concerned, it can be deduced from the material submitted that the owner has seriously tried to acquire a commercial position in the relevant market. 
V zvezi s tem je treba presoditi, ali je mogoče ob upoštevanju tržnih razmer v posebni zadevni gospodarski panogi ali trgovini na podlagi predloženega gradiva sklepati, da je imetnik resno poskušal pridobiti poslovni položaj na upoštevnem trgu.
The trade mark has to be used for goods or services already marketed or about to be marketed and for which preparations by the undertaking to secure customers are under way, particularly in the form of advertising campaigns (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 37). 
Blagovno znamko je treba uporabljati za blago ali storitve, ki se že tržijo ali se bodo kmalu začele tržiti in v zvezi s katerimi podjetje že izvaja dejavnosti za pritegnitev strank, zlasti z oglaševalskimi kampanjami (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 37).
This does not mean that the opponent has to reveal the total volume of sales or turnover figures. 
To ne pomeni, da mora vložnik ugovora razkriti podatke o celotnem obsegu prodaje ali prometu.
Concerning the extent of use made of the earlier mark, account must be taken, in particular, of the commercial volume of all the acts of use on the one hand and the duration of the period in which those acts of use occurred, as well as the frequency of those acts, on the other (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 35). 
V zvezi z obsegom uporabe prejšnje znamke je treba upoštevati zlasti, na eni strani, gospodarski obseg celote dejanj, ki pomenijo uporabo, in, na drugi strani, trajanje obdobja, v katerem so bila dejanja, ki pomenijo uporabo, izvrševana, ter pogostost dejanj (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 35).
The assessment entails a degree of interdependence between the factors taken into account. 
Taka presoja pomeni neko stopnjo soodvisnosti med upoštevanimi dejavniki.
Thus, the fact that commercial volume achieved under the mark was not high may be offset by the fact that use of the mark was extensive or very regular, and vice versa (08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 42). 
Tako se lahko majhen obseg proizvodov, ki se tržijo pod navedeno znamko, izravna z močno intenzivnostjo ali veliko stalnostjo med uporabo te znamke in obratno (08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 42).
Under certain circumstances, even circumstantial evidence such as catalogues featuring the trade mark, despite not providing direct information on the quantity of goods actually sold, can be sufficient by themselves to prove the extent of use in an overall assessment (15/07/2015, T398/13 TVR ITALIA (fig.) / TVR et al., EU:T:2015:503, § 57-58; 08/07/2010, T30/09, Peerstorm, EU:T:2010:298, § 42 et seq.). 
V nekaterih okoliščinah so lahko tudi posredni dokazi, kot so katalogi, v katerih je prikazana blagovna znamka, čeprav ne zagotavljajo neposrednih podatkov o količini dejansko prodanega blaga, sami po sebi zadostni za dokaz obsega uporabe v okviru celovite presoje (15/07/2015, T398/13 TVR ITALIA (fig.) / TVR et al., EU:T:2015:503, § 57-58; 08/07/2010, T30/09, Peerstorm, EU:T:2010:298, § 42 et seq.).
Use does not have to be made during a minimum period of time to qualify as ‘genuine'. 
Da bi se uporaba štela za resno in dejansko, ni nujno, da je potekala v minimalnem obdobju.
In particular, use does not have to be continuous throughout the relevant period of 5 years. 
Zlasti ni nujno, da v upoštevnem petletnem obdobju ves čas poteka neprekinjeno.
It is sufficient if use was made at the very beginning or end of the period, provided the use was genuine (16/12/2008, T86/07, Deitech, EU:T:2008:577). 
Zadostuje že, da je uporaba potekala na začetku ali koncu tega obdobja, če je le bila resna in dejanska (16/12/2008, T86/07, Deitech, EU:T:2008:577).
The exact decisive threshold proving genuine use cannot be defined out of context. 
Natančnega odločilnega praga za dokaz resne in dejanske uporabe ni mogoče opredeliti zunaj zadevnega okvira.
The turnover and volume of sales of the product must always be assessed in relation to all the other relevant factors, such as the volume of business, production or marketing capacity, or the degree of diversification of the undertaking using the trade mark, and the characteristics of the products or services on the relevant market. 
Promet in obseg prodaje zadevnega proizvoda je treba vedno presojati v povezavi z vsemi drugimi upoštevnimi dejavniki, kot so obseg poslovne dejavnosti, proizvodna ali prodajna zmogljivost oziroma stopnja razvejanosti podjetja, ki izkorišča blagovno znamko, in značilnosti proizvodov ali storitev na zadevnem trgu.
Use need not always be quantitatively significant for it to be deemed genuine, as that depends on the characteristics of the goods or services concerned on the corresponding market (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 39; 08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 42). 
Ni nujno, da je obseg uporabe vedno zelo velik, da bi jo bilo mogoče označiti za resno in dejansko, saj je ta odvisen od značilnosti zadevnega blaga ali storitev na zadevnem trgu (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 39; 08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 42).