While desperately trying to somehow squeeze the aspect that ‘French coffee spreads happiness in your brain‘ into my presentation for tomorrows KnowRight2010 conference, I think my presentation for tomorrow is ‘pretty much done‘.
As IT conferences In Austria usually don’t have too many attendees and as one might be of the opinion that it is not an overly good idea to have three sessions going on at the same time, this post shall serve as a teaser to maybe convince a few more people to attend my presentation (tomorrow, 10:30 – 12:00, Session 1B, HS 62, Juridicum, Vienna, Europe), or maybe on the other side, make it easier for some to find out that they are won’t miss anything 😉
Knowing myself that I will make changes until the very last second I don’t post the whole presentation for now, but instead I’d just like to present a few screenshots & summarize the whole presentation in a ‘nutshell‘. (An extensive German version can be found in the 2010/4 issue of MarkenR: Ott/Schubert, Fremde Marken als Keywörter – Orakelsprüche des EuGH als Antwort auf biblische Fragen, MarkenR 2010, 160)
Title: ‘It’s the ad-text, stupid`- Conclusions drawn from the ECJ’s Google France Rulings
Topic: Keyword Advertising
– No legal certainty yet/still.
– Keyword Advertising on its own does not infringe TM-law. The content of the ad might however.
– The ECJ unfortunately doesn’t really give a clue what an ad has to look like as not to ‘adversely affect’ the TM’s function of ‘indicating origin‘.
– The reasoning the ECJ brought forward to explain that the ‘advertising function‘ is not ‘adversely affected‘ isn’t conclusive at all.
– The court indeed gave some hints, concerning the liability exemption of Art 14, but does he expect a French court to accept such subtle ‘hints‘?
– In the course of the decisions (Google France, Bergspechte) the ECJ also established a new criteria which TM-use has to fulfil to violate Art (5) (1) (a).
In the chart above the green “tickmark” indicates that Art (5) is actually infringed.
This chart compares the ‘Levels of Protection‘ granted by the different provisions of Art 5.
Hopefully see you tomorrow! 🙂
PS: Despite my slight criticism a big Thank You to the organizing team of the conference and all the people who helped with my presentation!