Netherlands: Acquired distinctiveness in indivisible territory

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Netherlands: Acquired distinctiveness in indivisible territory

Of the total population of the Netherlands of 16.8 million people, 2.2 million have seen the final episode of the second season of "Heel Holland bakt". This makes it one of the most popular television shows in the Netherlands of the past few years.

"Heel Holland bakt" is the Dutch version of the British television hit show "The Great British Bake Off"; it could be translated as "the whole of Holland is baking". Although the Dutch show is very popular, the trade mark application for Heel Holland Bakt was refused by the Benelux Office for lack of distinctive character and descriptiveness.

Descriptiveness of a sign in one of the languages of the Benelux countries (French, Dutch or German) is a common problem for Benelux trade mark owners. So it is in this case. The Dutch wording "Heel Holland bakt" is not descriptive for the French speaking part of the Benelux public, but was found descriptive for the Dutch speaking public.

Fortunately, it is possible to get a descriptive sign registered in case it acquires distinctiveness after all. In order to prove acquired distinctiveness the applicant must demonstrate that the sign is perceived by the relevant public as a trade mark that distinguishes goods or services of the applicant through its very use. The Benelux Court of Justice has decided that a sign that was not distinctive originally can only be registered if acquired distinctiveness is demonstrated prior to the application date.

With respect to trade mark rights the Benelux countries are one indivisible territory. For proving acquired distinctiveness through use this could form a further complication. The point is that the Dutch speaking public does not only live in The Netherlands but also in a part of Belgium (Vlaanderen). As "Heel Holland bakt" is only used as a trade mark in the Netherlands (the Belgian counterpart of "The Great British Bake Off" being called "De Meesterbakker") problems occur.

A sign can only be registered based on acquired distinctiveness if the sign is qualified as a trade mark in the whole of Benelux. Therefore, acquired distinctiveness must always be demonstrated in the entire Benelux territory. So if a sign that is descriptive in Dutch is only used in Belgium, it will be very difficult to proof that the sign acquired distinctiveness in the whole of the Benelux.

However, there is an exception to this rule: if a trade mark has an inherent geographical boundary, acquired distinctiveness should only be proved within this specific territory.

For the case at hand, "Heel Holland bakt" this means that proof of intensive use in The Netherlands (Holland) alone is sufficient to get the mark registered. And that is exactly what happened with the trade mark Heel Holland bakt. The proof of intensive use changed the minds of the examiners of the Benelux Office and the mark is now registered for all goods and services applied for.

Most of the readers of this article will not very often be confronted with signs that are descriptive in Dutch, let alone marks that are only used in the Dutch speaking part of Belgium or in the Netherlands. It is much more common that a sign is filed as a trade mark which could be considered descriptive in English. For those trade mark owners it is important to keep in mind that the general Benelux public is sufficiently familiar with the English language. Assuming that the meaning of an English term is understood in every part of the Benelux territory, acquired distinctiveness has to be proven in every part of the Benelux

Witteman_Maaike-100

Maaike Witteman


V.O.Johan de Wittlaan 72517 JR The HagueThe NetherlandsTel: +31 70 416 67 11Fax: +31 70 416 67 99info@vo.euwww.vo.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

In the ninth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP & ME, a community focused on ethnic minority IP professionals
Firms that made strategic PTAB hires say that insider expertise is becoming more valuable in the wake of USPTO changes
Aled Richards-Jones, a litigator and qualified barrister, is the fourth partner to join the firm’s growing patent litigation team this year
An IP lawyer tasked with helping to develop Brownstein’s newly unveiled New York office is eyeing a measured approach to talent hunting
Amanda Griffiths, who will be tasked with expanding the firm’s trademark offering in New Zealand, says she hopes to offer greater flexibility to clients at her new home
News of EasyGroup failing in its trademark infringement claim against ‘Easihire’ and Amgen winning a key appeal at the UPC were also among the top talking points
Submit your nominations to this year's WIBL EMEA Awards by February 16 2026
Edward Russavage and Maria Crusey at Wolf Greenfield say that OpenAI MDL could broaden discovery and reshape how clients navigate AI copyright disputes
The UPC has increased some fees by as much as 32%, but firms and their clients had been getting a good deal so far
Meryl Koh, equity director and litigator at Drew & Napier in Singapore, discusses an uptick in cross-border litigation and why collaboration across practice areas is becoming crucial
Gift this article