Russia: Halloween cannot be privatised

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

Russia: Halloween cannot be privatised

An applicant filed a trade mark application for Halloween in respect of goods in classes 4, 9, 16, 21, 24-26 and 28 (see picture).

halloween.jpg

The examiner in the patent office rejected the application, then the applicant appealed the decision of the examiner at the appellate board and again lost. The rejection was based on a number of considerations.

Halloween is one of the oldest holidays in the world. It is a mixture of Celtic and Christian traditions to worship their saints. The origin of Halloween dates back thousands of years. There is a Celtic festival named Samhain which marks the end of the harvest season and the beginning of winter or the darker half of the year. It may also be associated with Pomona, a goddess of fruitful abundance in ancient Roman religion. Ireland is considered to be the home country of Halloween though it is the United States where the traditional Halloween is celebrated on a large scale.

It came to Russia in the 1990s and remains exotic and ambiguous. It imbibed some of the traditions and is a holiday in a jocular and chilling style with specific paraphernalia, such as fancy dresses, masks, toys and souvenirs associated with specific subjects such as monsters, devilry, witchery and death. Though the holiday is not yet very popular, shops in many Russian cities and online stores offer a vast array of goods related to Halloween.

The collegium of the patent office concluded that the word Halloween is not distinctive and cannot represent its main function – individualize the goods in classes 4, 9, 16, 21, 24-26 and 28 (these goods are attributes of holiday fancy dresses, masks, knick knackery, glasses, post cards and other souvenir products). The word needs an unrestricted use and giving exclusive right to that word will deprive other persons from using it.

Besides, even though the claimed designation features a word element – "Halloween" which denotes a holiday – it also includes a symbol of death, a skeleton. According to the collegium of the patent office one cannot deny the fact that the image of skeleton symbolises a mummy, parched up body and eventually death. All this creates a negative connotation of the designation.

In this way, the patent office saved Halloween from being usurped by one person and allowed it for use by anybody who likes devilry.

biriulin.jpg

Vladimir Biriulin


Gorodissky & PartnersRussia 129010, MoscowB. Spasskaya Str25, stroenie 3Tel: +7 495 937 6116 / 6109Fax: +7 495 937 6104 / 6123pat@gorodissky.ru www.gorodissky.com 

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article