Steiff loses bear button CTM case

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Steiff loses bear button CTM case

German toy maker Steiff has been told by the EU’s General Court that it cannot obtain a Community trade mark for the label it attaches to its teddy bears’ ears with a button

 

In a ruling delivered today, the Court said that the attachment of a button or a label to the ear of a soft toy is not distinctive because it does not allow average consumers in the EU to know that the toy was made by Steiff.

The German company applied to OHIM for a CTM for its positional mark in 2010 to protect the position of the button in the middle of the ears of the toys, rather than a particular type of label or button.

OHIM said that the mark was devoid of distinctive character and that Steiff could not enjoy an exclusive right to produce soft toys that have a rectangular fabric label attached to their ears by way of a metal button fixed to the ear.

Now the General Court of the Court of Justice of the EU has backed OHIM. It said that the “positional” marks cannot be separated from the overall appearance of the toys. It also ruled that consumers would regard the button and label as a decorative element (one of many possible designs of soft toys) rather than as an indication of commercial origin.

The Court added that it was irrelevant whether Steiff was the only manufacturer to attach a shiny or matt round metal button to the ears of soft toys or a rectangular fabric label in the middle of the ear of soft toys.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Examiner statistics could help patent prosecution practitioners tailor strategies, turning an area of high variability into a potential competitive advantage
The England and Wales High Court’s ruling in Accord v Novartis may not rewrite the law on plausibility, but it does signal a pragmatic approach that could provide greater certainty for life sciences innovators
Firms with established sports relationships and specialised expertise are well positioned to capture the market’s expanded pool of IP work
Gunjan Paharia discusses developing RIA, an AI platform built to draw on decades of institutional knowledge, support junior lawyers, and reshape how legal teams work
A strong Canadian business helped lift profits, but the IP service group's latest results underline the pressure facing its operations in Australia, New Zealand and parts of Asia
Wins in court have been key to the six-year-old firm’s growth, as one of its founders explains
The firm’s co-CEO discusses patent litigation, collaboration with overseas colleagues and the next generation of leaders
Two recent decisions demonstrate the courts’ creativity in cutting-edge IP disputes that tested their jurisdictional powers
Aditi Verma Thakur, managing partner at Aishani Partners, discusses 5 am wake-ups, working with high-performing professionals and staying calm under pressure
After more than three decades at Wilson Sonsini, Ian Edvalson explains why he moved to expand his life sciences transactional practice
Gift this article