Time to rethink the limits to trade mark rights?

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

Time to rethink the limits to trade mark rights?

Last week the UK introduced clear exceptions to the rights of copyright owners. Is it now time to set out the limits to trade mark law and clarify what third parties can do with registered marks?

Among the changes introduced into the UK’s copyright regime on October 2 are a new format shifting exception and the right to use copyright material for legitimate parodies. There is also a new exception for criticism or review, which follows more exceptions for libraries, schools and disabled people, which came into force in June. Should there be similar exceptions for trade marks?

The answer from a group of more than 30 academics from across Europe seems to be yes. They have urged lawmakers considering the European Commission’s proposals to update the Trade Marks Directive and CTM Regulation to clarify what exceptions exist.

Court-of-justice-judges

In particular, they argue that the rights of trade mark owners need to be balanced with freedom of expression and the guarantee of undistorted competition, saying that such balance is important in the light of “ongoing technological, economic and social developments”.

The implication is that trade mark law has gone too far in protecting the rights of trade mark owners. That is an argument that may have gained strength since the Court of Justice of the EU (judges, pictured right) began expanding the list of legitimate “functions” of a trade mark.

Specifying a list of exceptions to trade mark rights might lead to rather messy, loophole-filled legislation. But perhaps it is necessary to preserve public support for trade mark law.

So far much of the debate about the right balance to be struck between the rights of IP owners and those of competitors and consumers has been focused on copyright (think ACTA, SOPA and PIPA) and on patents (think the debates on software and business method patents, and cases such as Myriad). In those areas of the law, it seems that a backlash from increasingly organised consumers and civil society has led to a rethink on the part of policy makers and a recognition on the part of IP owners that advocating a strong pro-IP position could ultimately weaken support for the whole IP system.

Does this new call from a group of academics reflect similar tensions within the trade mark sphere? If so, does the line between the rights of trade mark owners and the rights of trade mark users and third parties need to be redrawn? Let us know what you think.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

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
The firm says new role will be at the forefront of how it delivers value and will help bridge the gap between lawyers, clients and tech
Qantm IP’s CEO and AI programme lead discuss the business’s investment and M&A plans, and reveal their tech ambitions
Controversial plans were scrapped by the Commission earlier this year after the Parliament had previously backed them
Lawyers at Spoor & Fisher provide an overview of how South Africa is navigating copyright and consent requirements to improve access to works for blind and visually impaired people
Gillian Tan explains how she balances TM portfolio management with fast-moving deals, and why ‘CCP’ is a good acronym to live by
In the eighth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Ability, a network for disabled people and carers active in the IP profession
The longest government shutdown in US history froze ITC operations, yet IP practices stayed steady as firms relied on early preparation and client communication
Licensing chief Patrik Hammarén also reveals that the company will rename its IPR business to better reflect its role in defining standards
Gift this article