Trade marks are information carriers through which direct contact between buyers and sellers is obtained and maintained. In today’s consumer society, which is overburdened with increasingly subtle and artificial product differentiation, most purchasing decisions would be difficult without any feedback mechanism between the products on offer and potential consumers. Accordingly, producers need a symbol that is capable of providing this feedback by conveying the relevant information about the products to consumers, without boring or over-educating them. On the other hand, consumers need a symbol to guide their choice and express their preferences. To convey this information in an effective manner there must be a clear link with the producer, or at least the commercial entity responsible for marketing the product. The most convenient and effective way of establishing this link would be through the product’s trade mark. Nonetheless, modern business and marketing practices are increasingly driving a change in the role of trade marks from consumer protection tools to investment protection tools. This significant change has created a deep tension at the heart of trade mark law and has hindered attempts to formulate a coherent body of law. Accordingly, this thesis examines the causes of this tension by evaluating the current European trade marks protection system and its contributions towards promoting free competition and enhancing social and economic welfare. In addition, this thesis tests the developing national and Community trade mark decisions against economic arguments to judge how these decisions are responding to and dealing with the tension within the law. Moreover, the thesis explores how the law can avoid the problem of over or under protection by establishing a balance between protection of and access to trade marks rights. To achieve this goal the responsible authorities must resolve the fundamental challenges of ‘what do we want to protect in a trade mark?’ and leading on from this, ‘what is the scope of an efficient system of trade marks protection?’ Furthermore, this thesis considers how the trade marks system should deal with the wider economic functions of trade marks and their implications for the specific topics of dilution, comparative advertising and parallel importation. Finally, the thesis concludes by calling for the creation of a balanced trade mark protection system through the application of the legal and economic tools indentified throughout this study.

Overlaps of intellectual property rights are a phenomenon that is not yet fully understood and analyzed; yet it is an increasingly important issue due to development of new hybrid technologies that defy the established structure of the system. Despite the potential adverse effects this phenomenon can have on the integrity of the system, the problem of overlaps has been neglected in judicial and scholarly analyses. This research presents the thesis that all uses of intellectual property rights should be viewed in light of their purposes. In other words, the phenomenon of overlapping intellectual property rights is not a problem per se; instead, it is the use of the rights for incompatible purposes that may be considered objectionable. The analyses use the concept of balance of rights as the measuring rod for assessment of the consequences resulting from use of the overlapping rights. Thus, the dissertation investigates how use of intellectual property rights associated with one segment of the system can affect carefully crafted balance of rights of various stakeholders in an overlapping segment and whether effectiveness of this segment to advance its purposes will be impeded by such use. The analyses are also done with the aim to formulate a uniform answer to identified and potentially objectionable uses of overlapping rights in an attempt to provide the judiciary and law practitioners with analytical framework for resolving disputes involving overlaps in the intellectual property system. An adequate response to the challenge posed by improper use of overlapping intellectual property rights can be found in a properly construed doctrine of misuse of intellectual property rights. Because overlaps in the intellectual property system are a phenomenon that probably cannot be legislated in practical terms, this dissertation advocates adoption of a judicially created doctrine of misuse based on purposive analysis of intellectual property rights.

Overlaps of intellectual property rights are a phenomenon that is not yet fully understood and analyzed; yet it is an increasingly important issue due to development of new hybrid technologies that defy the established structure of the system. Despite the potential adverse effects this phenomenon can have on the integrity of the system, the problem of overlaps has been neglected in judicial and scholarly analyses. This research presents the thesis that all uses of intellectual property rights should be viewed in light of their purposes. In other words, the phenomenon of overlapping intellectual property rights is not a problem per se; instead, it is the use of the rights for incompatible purposes that may be considered objectionable. The analyses use the concept of balance of rights as the measuring rod for assessment of the consequences resulting from use of the overlapping rights. Thus, the dissertation investigates how use of intellectual property rights associated with one segment of the system can affect carefully crafted balance of rights of various stakeholders in an overlapping segment and whether effectiveness of this segment to advance its purposes will be impeded by such use. The analyses are also done with the aim to formulate a uniform answer to identified and potentially objectionable uses of overlapping rights in an attempt to provide the judiciary and law practitioners with analytical framework for resolving disputes involving overlaps in the intellectual property system. An adequate response to the challenge posed by improper use of overlapping intellectual property rights can be found in a properly construed doctrine of misuse of intellectual property rights. Because overlaps in the intellectual property system are a phenomenon that probably cannot be legislated in practical terms, this dissertation advocates adoption of a judicially created doctrine of misuse based on purposive analysis of intellectual property rights.

Overlaps of intellectual property rights are a phenomenon that is not yet fully understood and analyzed; yet it is an increasingly important issue due to development of new hybrid technologies that defy the established structure of the system. Despite the potential adverse effects this phenomenon can have on the integrity of the system, the problem of overlaps has been neglected in judicial and scholarly analyses. This research presents the thesis that all uses of intellectual property rights should be viewed in light of their purposes. In other words, the phenomenon of overlapping intellectual property rights is not a problem per se; instead, it is the use of the rights for incompatible purposes that may be considered objectionable. The analyses use the concept of balance of rights as the measuring rod for assessment of the consequences resulting from use of the overlapping rights. Thus, the dissertation investigates how use of intellectual property rights associated with one segment of the system can affect carefully crafted balance of rights of various stakeholders in an overlapping segment and whether effectiveness of this segment to advance its purposes will be impeded by such use. The analyses are also done with the aim to formulate a uniform answer to identified and potentially objectionable uses of overlapping rights in an attempt to provide the judiciary and law practitioners with analytical framework for resolving disputes involving overlaps in the intellectual property system. An adequate response to the challenge posed by improper use of overlapping intellectual property rights can be found in a properly construed doctrine of misuse of intellectual property rights. Because overlaps in the intellectual property system are a phenomenon that probably cannot be legislated in practical terms, this dissertation advocates adoption of a judicially created doctrine of misuse based on purposive analysis of intellectual property rights.

Overlaps of intellectual property rights are a phenomenon that is not yet fully understood and analyzed; yet it is an increasingly important issue due to development of new hybrid technologies that defy the established structure of the system. Despite the potential adverse effects this phenomenon can have on the integrity of the system, the problem of overlaps has been neglected in judicial and scholarly analyses. This research presents the thesis that all uses of intellectual property rights should be viewed in light of their purposes. In other words, the phenomenon of overlapping intellectual property rights is not a problem per se; instead, it is the use of the rights for incompatible purposes that may be considered objectionable. The analyses use the concept of balance of rights as the measuring rod for assessment of the consequences resulting from use of the overlapping rights. Thus, the dissertation investigates how use of intellectual property rights associated with one segment of the system can affect carefully crafted balance of rights of various stakeholders in an overlapping segment and whether effectiveness of this segment to advance its purposes will be impeded by such use. The analyses are also done with the aim to formulate a uniform answer to identified and potentially objectionable uses of overlapping rights in an attempt to provide the judiciary and law practitioners with analytical framework for resolving disputes involving overlaps in the intellectual property system. An adequate response to the challenge posed by improper use of overlapping intellectual property rights can be found in a properly construed doctrine of misuse of intellectual property rights. Because overlaps in the intellectual property system are a phenomenon that probably cannot be legislated in practical terms, this dissertation advocates adoption of a judicially created doctrine of misuse based on purposive analysis of intellectual property rights.

The harmonisation of the European Trade Mark laws and the introduction of unconventional marks under this regime have encouraged interested parties to seek registration of chemical senses (scent and taste) as trade marks. This thesis studies the current state of affairs of these types of marks. It discusses in general, the panorama that these types of marks have when registrability is at issue. The purpose of this research is therefore to scrutinise the trade mark legal system, including a discussion of the origins and rationale underlying it, to try to understand the burdens presented when registering chemical sense marks. The starting point of this thesis is that the European Regulation and the Directive of the Trade Mark law open the door to the protection of chemical senses under the Trade Mark law regime. Yet, despite some early successful registration, their fate is still burdened with uncertainty and therefore the rationale for this study is to try to find whether chemical sense marks are truly marks and therefore protectable under the trade mark system. The approach chosen addresses the examination of all requirements for a sign to be protected under the trade mark system. The reason is that protection of chemical senses might be granted if such marks are recognised as signs, are graphically represented and are capable of distinguishing products of one undertaking from those of another undertaking. By examining the aforementioned requirements, the study reveals that while chemical senses marks might be seen as marks, they find that registration is not quite feasible. The thesis emphasises that graphic representation is only one of the many issues that chemical sense marks are confronted with. Issues such as distinctiveness, the need to keep free and functionality remain problematic. Moreover, the scope of protection afforded to chemical sense marks are yet untested. Case law will ascertain that the intent behind the trade mark regime to grant registration to chemical senses is unresolved. Still, the significant interest in chemical senses as trade marks appears to be not softening by this notion.

In the search for companies to distinguish themselves from the mass, so called non-traditional trade marks have become increasingly popular, and in particular colour marks. It is now clear that abstract colour marks can be registered as trade marks, and the number of registered colour marks has increased considerably in recent years. However, it remains a lot more uncertain, mainly due to lack of case law, what the extent of colour marks’ scope of protection is. Are colours actually worth protecting? The purpose of this thesis is to examine the scope of protection of registered abstract colour marks from an EU perspective. Through this examination it will also be established whether colours are worth protecting. The essential function of trade marks is to indicate the origin of products. Signs that are capable of being represented graphically and capable of distinguishing goods and services from one undertaking from those of other undertakings can be registered as trade marks. Colours can fulfil these criteria in certain circumstances, however, colours can practically never have distinctive character per se. Instead, they must have acquired distinctive character through use. Since it is quite difficult to register colour marks, a colour mark proprietor should be prepared to have the validity of his trade mark challenged if he issues proceedings for infringement. There are a few national cases from EU Member States that have concerned infringement of colour marks, and in all of these the plaintiff was successful in claiming infringement. Through the decisions in these cases, general legal principles and statements made in literature, the scope of protection of colour marks has been examined. Infringement of a colour mark occurs in three different situations: where there is likelihood of confusion, where there is double identity and where there is dilution of a trade mark with a reputation. Some of the most important findings are that confusingly similar colours include adjacent shades, but in order to prove likelihood of confusion, the infringing colour must probably be perceived by the public as an indication of origin and other signs that appear together with the colour must probably be taken into account, which limits the scope of protection to some extent. However, since colour marks must almost always have acquired distinctive character through use, consumers are used to perceiving that colour as a trade mark in relation to those types of goods/services, and are therefore more likely to do so also when the colour is used by the third party. Furthermore, there have to be an individual assessment in each case in order to determine whether surrounding signs exclude a likelihood of confusion, where all factors should be considered, including the distinctiveness of the colour mark and how clear and prominent the other signs are. In situations of double identity, the infringing sign does not have to be used as a trade mark, which is advantageous for colour mark owners. Furthermore, identical colours can possibly include other shades if they are so similar that the difference is barely perceptible in a direct comparison. Colour marks can often qualify as trade marks with a reputation, since the assessment of whether trade marks have a reputation is similar to the assessment of whether trade marks have acquired distinctive character through use. Trade marks with a reputation has an extended protection meaning that if a third party uses a sign that is identical or similar to a trade mark with a reputation, and that use without due cause takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark, then that use constitutes infringement. This applies both in relation to identical, similar and dissimilar products, however, it will probably only apply in relation to identical or similar products when it comes to colour marks, due to the extensive use of colours in the market. The extended protection could be relevant in particular in situations where likelihood of confusion cannot be proven, because the public does not perceive the infringing sign as a trade mark or because of surrounding prominent signs. This examination shows that the scope of protection of colour marks is not great, it has some weaknesses. However, it is definitely not worthless either, which clearly shows in the fact that the plaintiffs were successful in claiming infringement in all of the infringement cases. By registering a colour as a trade mark, a company can to some extent stop others from using the same or similar colour, and it will also most likely have a discouraging effect. However, some carefulness should still be applied in relation to colour marks, since this is still a very new phenomenon and additional case law can take another direction. But considering how the situation looks today, colours are worth protecting as trade marks.

<p>In the search for companies to distinguish themselves from the mass, so called non-traditional trade marks have become increasingly popular, and in particular colour marks. It is now clear that abstract colour marks can be registered as trade marks, and the number of registered colour marks has increased considerably in recent years. However, it remains a lot more uncertain, mainly due to lack of case law, what the extent of colour marks’ scope of protection is. Are colours actually worth protecting? The purpose of this thesis is to examine the scope of protection of registered abstract colour marks from an EU perspective. Through this examination it will also be established whether colours are worth protecting.</p><p>The essential function of trade marks is to indicate the origin of products. Signs that are capable of being represented graphically and capable of distinguishing goods and services from one undertaking from those of other undertakings can be registered as trade marks. Colours can fulfil these criteria in certain circumstances, however, colours can practically never have distinctive character per se. Instead, they must have acquired distinctive character through use. Since it is quite difficult to register colour marks, a colour mark proprietor should be prepared to have the validity of his trade mark challenged if he issues proceedings for infringement.</p><p>There are a few national cases from EU Member States that have concerned infringement of colour marks, and in all of these the plaintiff was successful in claiming infringement. Through the decisions in these cases, general legal principles and statements made in literature, the scope of protection of colour marks has been examined. Infringement of a colour mark occurs in three different situations: where there is likelihood of confusion, where there is double identity and where there is dilution of a trade mark with a reputation.</p><p>Some of the most important findings are that confusingly similar colours include adjacent shades, but in order to prove likelihood of confusion, the infringing colour must probably be perceived by the public as an indication of origin and other signs that appear together with the colour must probably be taken into account, which limits the scope of protection to some extent. However, since colour marks must almost always have acquired distinctive character through use, consumers are used to perceiving that colour as a trade mark in relation to those types of goods/services, and are therefore more likely to do so also when the colour is used by the third party. Furthermore, there have to be an individual assessment in each case in order to determine whether surrounding signs exclude a likelihood of confusion, where all factors should be considered, including the distinctiveness of the colour mark and how clear and prominent the other signs are.</p><p>In situations of double identity, the infringing sign does not have to be used as a trade mark, which is advantageous for colour mark owners. Furthermore, identical colours can possibly include other shades if they are so similar that the difference is barely perceptible in a direct comparison.</p><p>Colour marks can often qualify as trade marks with a reputation, since the assessment of whether trade marks have a reputation is similar to the assessment of whether trade marks have acquired distinctive character through use. Trade marks with a reputation has an extended protection meaning that if a third party uses a sign that is identical or similar to a trade mark with a reputation, and that use without due cause takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark, then that use constitutes infringement. This applies both in relation to identical, similar and dissimilar products, however, it will probably only apply in relation to identical or similar products when it comes to colour marks, due to the extensive use of colours in the market. The extended protection could be relevant in particular in situations where likelihood of confusion cannot be proven, because the public does not perceive the infringing sign as a trade mark or because of surrounding prominent signs.</p><p>This examination shows that the scope of protection of colour marks is not great, it has some weaknesses. However, it is definitely not worthless either, which clearly shows in the fact that the plaintiffs were successful in claiming infringement in all of the infringement cases. By registering a colour as a trade mark, a company can to some extent stop others from using the same or similar colour, and it will also most likely have a discouraging effect. However, some carefulness should still be applied in relation to colour marks, since this is still a very new phenomenon and additional case law can take another direction. But considering how the situation looks today, colours are worth protecting as trade marks.</p>

This diploma thesis deals with trade marks with reputation materia as a subgroup of trade marks connected with greater protection. First parts of this thesis are dedicated to an introduction to the trade mark law, in particular the inclusion of trade mark law in the legal system, principles governing this branch of law description and especially familiarization with the Czech trade mark law sources through an enumeration of the individual regulations, along with their significance. Parts three and four then are focused on the concept of trade mark with reputation and the specifics analysed also by comparison with the famous trade mark, because these two concepts are united in their development, which is also described. In the fifth part, the concept of luxury brands is described for the purposes of this thesis, where importance of reputation for luxury brands is covered through luxury brands characteristics analysis, and expanded in the context of individual court decisions, not only the European institutions. The final part of this thesis presents selected decisions relating to non-traditional trade marks as they constitute a higher level of protection, even though at different level, and thus they are related to the concept of reputation, especially in the context of trade mark law trends that will be...

The availability of a wide range of branded products makes the selection of the right type of good a difficult process. This is particularly true in the case of goods whose characteristics consumers do not have complete information about, which they can only learn about after purchasing (experience goods). A trade mark quality guarantee facilitates consumers’ choice by sending quality signals. It also enables a trader of branded goods to differentiate the quality of his goods from those of his competitors. Accordingly, trade mark protection is said to enhance economic efficiency, and thus the production of quality goods, and reduce consumer search costs. In order for this to work, however, among other conditions, the trader must maintain consistent quality over time and across consumers. Otherwise, trade mark protection will enhance artificial product differentiation, and thus distort competition. To date, despite its profound significance, the quality guarantee is seen as performing an economic function that trade mark law is ill equipped to deal with. As a result, this function is not enforced under trade mark law. Contrary to mainstream thinking, this thesis argues that the quality function of a trade mark should be recognised and enforced through trade mark law. What is at stake is far from insignificant: it is about bridging the ever increasing gap between the legal rationales for trade mark protection and the economic consequences of this protection in practice. The thesis is also about how consumers should shape their relationship with trade marks and what role law should play in constructing that relationship. By giving independent legal substance to the quality function, trade mark law encourages a trader to improve the quality of his goods instead of simply improving the persuasive or advertising value of the mark, which, in turn, enhances artificial product differentiation, increases rather than decreases consumer search costs, and distorts competition.