©-LAW

In late February, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its long-awaited  [the  Opinion  of Advocate General (AG) Bobek, on which see  here , had been released in July 2019]  judgment in  Constantin Film , C-240/18 P , aka the  Fack Ju Göhte  case concerning the interpretation of the morality absolute ground in EU trade mark (EUTM) law. The decision is both interesting and important for a number of reasons, including trade mark law, the role of freedom of expression, and also ... copyright.  Let’s see, first, what happened and, then, what the implications of the ruling are. Background Can the sign ‘Fack Ju Göhte’, which is also the name of a  successful German comedy  (followed by two sequels) be registered as an EUTM? Things have not proved easy for this application, initially filed in 2015 for a variety of goods and services in various classes under the  previous Regulation   [t...

It just a few months ago that this blog  reported  on the  Opinion  of Advocate General Tanchev in the  important  Sky v SkyKick , C-371/18 case . A referral from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales made by Arnold J (as he then was), the  Sky  case is probably  the most important referral in the EU trade mark field made over the past few years . It asked the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to clarify: Whether an EU or national trade mark may be declared  wholly  or  partially  invalid  on the ground that some or all of the terms in the specification of goods and services are lacking in sufficient clarity and precision to enable the competent authorities and third parties to determine on the basis of those terms alone the extent of the protection conferred by the trade mark; In case that answer to the question above is in the affirmative, whether a term like  'computer softwa...

A few days ago the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) issued yet another interesting judgment, which - albeit not directly related to IP - might be nonetheless relevant for the interpretation and application of public policy/morality exclusions, especially in the case of blasphemous and offensive subject matter. The decision is the one in   E.S. v Austria , Application No 38450/12 . Background The case related to the applicant's criminal conviction in Austria for  disparaging religious doctrines  (Articles 188 and 283 of the Austrian Criminal Code) , and her claim that this violated her freedom of expression under Article 10 of the  European Convention on Human Rights  (ECHR). More specifically, the conviction resulted from a series of  public  seminars entitled 'Basic Information on Islam' that the applicant had delivered  at the right-wing Freedom Party Education Institute . One of these seminars was attended...