Austria: Supreme Court confirms Fair use is devoid of distinctiveness
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Austria: Supreme Court confirms Fair use is devoid of distinctiveness

The case reported here concerns the application for registration of a figurative mark containing the word element "FairUse" in relation to print media (class 16), services in class 35 (computer databases, computer networks), class 38 (electronic communication) and class 41 (online publication of electronic newspapers).

The Austrian Patent Office and the appeal court both denied registration of the trade mark for lack of distinctiveness. The applicant took this case to the Supreme Court, but without success. In its decision, the Supreme Court remarked that "fair use" is a legal doctrine in US copyright law that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders, for example in schools.

The Supreme Court went on to state that the term "fair use" has also been used in Europe, for example in respect of the reform of copyright law. Thus, the targeted consumers will perceive the sign as an indication that use of the offered goods and services is not subject to a contractual licence, but is legitimate within the boundaries of "fair use".

In this way, the Supreme Court found, the sign for which protection is sought would not be perceived as an indication of origin from a specific undertaking but as a mere description of the terms of use for the goods and services. The Supreme Court did not follow the applicant’s argument that the reasoning of the famous cjeu decision in Baby-dry (C-383/99) or similar decisions from the Austrian courts could be applied to the sign in question. In contrast to the signs concerned in these decisions, Fair use is not a term created by the applicant. On the other hand, the graphical elements were found insufficient to guarantee the identity of origin for the goods and services covered by the application. The decision to reject the application thus became final.

The findings of the Supreme Court seem "fair use" of the case law of European courts, which have become increasingly reluctant to accept strongly allusive terms for trade mark registration. The Austrian courts also follow the European lead in that minimal graphical adornments will not pave the applicant's way towards trade mark registration.

Johannes Strobl


SONN & PARTNER PatentanwälteRiemergasse 14A-1010 Vienna, AustriaTel: +43 1 512 84 05Fax: +43 1 512 98 05office@sonn.atwww.sonn.at

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

High-earning businesses place most value on the depth of the external legal teams advising them, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
Kilpatrick Townsend was recognised as Americas firm of the year, while patent powerhouse James Haley won a lifetime achievement award
Partners at Foley Hoag and Kilburn & Strode explore how US and UK courts have addressed questions of AI and inventorship
In-house lawyers have considerable influence over law firms’ actions, so they must use that power to push their external advisers to adopt sustainable practices
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Counsel say they’re advising clients to keep a close eye on confidentiality agreements after the FTC voted to ban non-competes
Data from Managing IP+’s Talent Tracker shows US firms making major swoops for IP teams, while South Korea has also been a buoyant market
The finalists for the 13th annual awards have been announced
Counsel reveal how a proposal to create separate briefings for discretionary denials at the USPTO could affect their PTAB strategies
The UK Supreme Court rejected the firm’s appeal against an earlier ruling because it did not raise an arguable point of law
Gift this article