Eleonora Rosati in IPKat ci notizia della confrma d’appello EUIPO secondo cui non è intrinsecamente distintivo il marchio seriale di Prada sotto rappresentato
o perlomeno non lo è per la maggior parte dei prodotti indicxati indomanda.
E’ infatti dal pubblico perceptico come decorativo, non come indicatore dell’rigina imnrpenditoriale (giudizio dubbio, data ormai la sua notorietà, ma forse alla fine esatto) e comnque siffuso nel commercio, almeno per certi prodotti
Si tratta di 2nd Board od Appeal 19.12.2023, case R 827/2023-2, Prada SA Applicant / Appellant .
Sul trattamento dei pattern trademarks:
<<24 That case-law, which was developed in relation to three-dimensional trade marks
consisting of the appearance of the product itself, also applies where the contested mark is
a figurative mark consisting of the two-dimensional representation of that product. In such
a case, the mark likewise does not consist of a sign unrelated to the appearance of the
products it covers (21/04/2015, T-359/12, Device of a checked pattern (maroon & beige),
EU:T:2015:215, § 24 and case-law cited). The same applies to a pattern mark consisting
of the two-dimensional representation of that product.
25 That is also the case for a figurative mark consisting of a part of the shape of the product
that it represents, inasmuch as the relevant public will immediately and without further
thought perceive it as a representation of a particularly interesting or attractive detail of
the product in question, rather than as an indication of its commercial origin (21/04/2015,
T-359/12, Device of a checked pattern (maroon & beige), EU:T:2015:215, § 25 and case-
law cited). The same applies to a pattern mark consisting of a part of the shape of the
product that it represents>>
Ineressanti sono poi le consiederaozipni sul raggruppamento dei prodotti in classi omogenee al fine del giudizio di distintività a