Het Gerecht bevestigt de weigering van bescherming van het internationale woordmerk “RELY-ABLE” in de Europese Unie voor diensten op medisch gebied. Het merk mist elk onderscheidend vermogen (artikel 7(1)(b) GMeV): het aangevraagde teken zal door het in aanmerking komend publiek, bestaande uit het Engelssprekende deel van de Europese Unie dat specialistische medische kennis heeft en derhalve een hoog aandachtsniveau, worden opgevat als een onjuist gespelde variatie op het woord “reliable”. Deze variatie is bovendien niet bijzonder fantasierijk of willekeurig, zodat het als een lovende term ten aanzien van de betreffende diensten zal worden gezien en niet als aanduiding van de commerciële herkomst van de diensten.
21 In the present case, it must be observed that the misspelling of the adjective ‘reliable’ in the sign at issue is perceptible visually rather than phonetically, so that there is no conceptual ambiguity for the relevant public. Even visually, it is apparent that the applicant has simply broken down the adjective ‘reliable’ into its verbal root ‘rely’ and its adjectival suffix ‘able’. The deconstruction of an adjective into its verbal root and its adjectival suffix is not unusual in a language such as English, and even less so for the relevant public, which is made up of highly attentive specialists, as the applicant recognises in its pleadings. It follows that the sign RELY-ABLE will, despite the misspelling, be immediately perceived and understood by the relevant public – even specialised – as meaning ‘reliable’, without the need for any interpretation.
22 The meaning of the word ‘reliable’ is clearly laudatory or promotional in relation to the services concerned, in particular clinical trials. It is well known, as indeed the applicant acknowledged at the hearing, that reliability is one of the main features of clinical trials.
23 Accordingly, it must be stated that the Board of Appeal did not err in taking the view (i) that the relevant public would directly perceive the sign RELY-ABLE as a deliberate misspelling of the English word ‘reliable’, and not as a particularly unusual, fanciful or striking spelling of such a kind as to confer distinctive character on that sign and (ii) that the laudatory or promotional meaning of the sign RELY‑ABLE, which is immediately perceived and understood as such by the relevant public, eclipsed any impression that the sign could indicate the commercial...
↧
IEPT20130430, GEU, Boehringer Ingelheim v BHIM
↧
