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

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

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

Academic Eden Sarid joins us during Pride Month to discuss queer expression and IP law, Patagonia v Pattie Gonia, and how queer and AI-generated creations both pose novelty concerns
Patent attorney Michael Henson joins the firm to lead its freshly launched blockchain and digital assets practice
A dispute over mammogram technology, and a development in the case between GSK and Moderna were also among the top talking points in recent weeks
With rankings for Western Europe set to be published on June 25, we sat down with our research lead to find out what practitioners and law firms can expect
Peter O’Sullivan, a professional services executive, says he is looking forward to helping Pearce IP become the leading life sciences firm in Australia and New Zealand
Matteo Di Lernia, advocate at LCA Studio Legale, unpicks the CJEU’s ruling in M.M. Ristorazione v Villa Ramazzini, including its impact on litigation strategies
Leaders at IP boutique say the decision to pursue sponsorless partnership with the specialised investment arm of a private equity firm comes at a time of ‘profound transformation’ in the profession
Patrick Zhang, formerly of Atlassian and TiVo, will become Via’s vice president of licensing and commercial strategy, tasked with helping expand client partnerships and licensing deals
IP services firm says new platform will cut patent portfolio analysis from months to minutes and optimise monetisation efforts
New role for the High Court judge will leave a gap for an IP specialist judge at the first instance
Gift this article