Domestic Sweden TM rejected as ‘advertising slogan’
The EU General Court has confirmed that a mobile living provider’s mark would be understood as an “advertising slogan” rather than an indication of origin, meaning it can’t be registered as a trademark.
The General Court’s Eighth Chamber delivered judgment yesterday, March 22.
Domestic Sweden, a provider of mobile living products and services, applied to register ‘Mobile Living Made Easy’ with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in 2015 for a range of classes. The trademark covered products such as cleaning goods, toilets and temperature control apparatus, and services including maintenance relating to mobile homes.
In 2016, an examiner rejected the application, finding the word mark devoid of any distinctive character. The EUIPO’s Second Board of Appeal agreed with the examiner, rejecting Domestic Sweden’s appeal in 2017.
The appeal board said the sign would be interpreted as a promotional “laudatory” message, highlighting Domestic Sweden’s products which make mobile living easy, rather than offering an indication of commercial origin.
Domestic Sweden appealed against the decision to the EU General Court.
The mobile living company didn’t dispute the meaning of the expression “mobile living made easy”, but argued that the goods and services covered by the applied-for mark fall within distinct categories.
It said the board erred when it defined all of the covered goods and services as falling within one homogeneous category rather than assessing each distinct category in relation to the mark.
But the General Court found that the board’s decision was “sufficiently reasoned”.
Domestic Sweden also claimed that the board had wrongly found the applied-for mark devoid of any distinctive character.
The company also argued that the goods and services in question were distinct as they differ in their role of facilitating mobile life, and so should not be grouped into one homogeneous category.
Again, the court disagreed.
In its reasoning, the court cited the Court of Justice of the European Union’s (CJEU) decision in EUIPO v Deluxe Entertainment Services Group (2017). The CJEU said that despite certain differences, all the goods and services covered by an applied-for mark may have a common characteristic relevant to the EUIPO’s analysis, which enables the board to place them within a single homogeneous group.
The General Court said that in this case, the board was correct to find that the goods and services belonged to a single category, given the common characteristic of the facilitation of mobile life.
According to the court, the appeal board’s finding doesn’t mean that all the goods and services contribute “in the same way or with the same intensity” to mobile life.
In addition, as the relevant public is the English-speaking public, the applied-for mark’s meaning “has a promotional content” as it communicates a message regarding the quality of the goods and services it relates to.
The court confirmed that the applied-for mark would be perceived as an “advertising slogan” and that it doesn’t feature any distinctive element.
It dismissed the appeal and ordered Domestic Sweden to pay the costs.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.
Today's top stories
US reveals $60bn tariffs on China
TiVo enjoys ‘limited success’ in UKIPO trademark appeal
