According
to the judgment of 25 November 2014 (Case T-450/09) of the Court of Justice of
the European Union, "the registration of the shape of the Rubik's Cube as
a EU trademark is valid. The graphical representation of the cube does not
involve a technical solution that prevents it to be protected as a trademark.
"
The ruling solves
a dispute arose as a result a registration request in front of the the application filed in 1996, by Seven
Towns a British company that manages the intellectual property rights related
to the "Rubik's Cube" - for the registration as a
Community trade mark of the three-dimensional shape of the cube to "puzzle
in three dimensions.
In 1999 Seven
Towns registered the famous cubes as a European trade mark. In 2006 Simba Toy,
a German company that manufactures toys, filed for declaration of invalidity of
the trademark.
According
to the Court, the thick black lines that are part of that structure and
appearing on the representations of the cube drawing a grid within them do not
make any reference to a rotation capacity of the individual elements of the
cube and, therefore, are not a technical function.
Indeed, the
ability of rotation of the vertical and horizontal bands of the Rubik's cube is
not derived from or black lines nor the grid structure, but by an internal
mechanism of the cube that is invisible on its graphical representations.
Consequently, the registration of the shape of the Rubik's Cube as a EU trademark can not be denied on the ground that it incorporates a technical
function.
The Court
also notes that the mark in question does not entitle the owner to prevent
third parties to market all kinds of puzzles in three dimensions with a
capacity of rotation, since the monopoly of commercialization of the owner is
limited to the puzzle three dimensions having the shape of a cube whose faces
are posted grid structure.
Finally,
the Court considers that the cubic structure grid stand considerably from the
representations of other puzzles in three dimensions on the market. This
structure is therefore equipped with a distinctive character that enables
consumers to identify the producer of the goods for which the mark is
registered.
The ruling can
now be appealed before the Court of Justice within two months of its service.
No comments:
Post a Comment