France: Mere storage of infringing goods does not constitute trademark use

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

France: Mere storage of infringing goods does not constitute trademark use

Sponsored by

beau-de-lomenie.png
warehouse indoor view

In a much awaited preliminary decision, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled on April 2 2020 (C-567/18 Coty Germany GmbH v Amazon Services Europe Sarl et al) on the responsibilities of Amazon warehouse-keepers in relation to the sale by a third-party seller on the online marketplace, Amazon Marketplace, of perfume bottles for which the rights had not been exhausted.

On appeal filed by Coty, the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice, Germany) decided to refer a question for a preliminary ruling to the European Court of Justice. The question was as follows:

Can a person who, on behalf of a third party, stores goods which infringe trademark rights, without having knowledge of that infringement, be regarded as holding those goods for the purpose of offering them or placing them on the market if it is not that person but the third party who, alone, pursues the aim of offering the goods for sale or putting them on the market?

According to the court, the concept of "using", according to its "ordinary meaning", implies active behaviour and direct or indirect control of the act constituting the use (paragraph 37). The court adds that, "in order for the storage of goods bearing signs identical, or similar to, trademarks to be classified as "using" those signs, it is also necessary…for the economic operator providing the storage itself to pursue the aim referred to by those provisions, which is offering the goods or putting them on the market."

That means that the warehouse-keeper would have to himself pursue the aim of offering the goods for sale or putting them on the market.

The court therefore ruled that a person who, on behalf of a third party, stores goods which infringe trademark rights, without being aware of that infringement, must be regarded as not stocking those goods in order to offer them or put them on the market for the purposes of those provisions, if that person does not himself pursue those aims.

Thus the mere storage of goods by Amazon as a warehouse-keeper on behalf of a third-party seller does not constitute an infringement.

Aurélia Marie

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Three sources explain why a notification by Nanjing’s IP centre in China banning AI use in patent drafting is too broad and could be difficult to enforce
Sheppard Mullin’s latest hires explain why the firm's industry expertise impressed them
Elizabeth Godfrey explains why she doesn’t believe in a ‘salesperson’ approach to BD, and reveals how AI is playing an important role at Davies Collison Cave
Partner moves data from April and May showed the firm boosted its presence in California, while another firm expanded in Atlanta
Angela Oliver shares tips for preparing oral arguments, and reveals her passion for marine biology
The Getty Images v Stability AI case, which will hear untested points of law, is a reminder of the importance of the legal system and the excitement it can generate
Firms explain the IP concerns that can arise amid attempts by brands to show off their ‘Canadianness’ to consumers
Counsel say they will be monitoring issues such as the placement of house marks, and how Mondelēz demonstrates a likelihood of confusion in its dispute with Aldi
The EUIPO expanding its mediation services and a new Riyadh office for Simmons & Simmons were also among the top talking points this week
David Boundy explains why Pierson Ferdinand provides a platform that will allow him to use administrative law to address IP concerns
Gift this article