EU General Court backs decision dismissing ‘Ezmix’ trademark
An EU court has backed the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in dismissing a trademark application from a music company relating to downloadable music files and software.
The decision was handed down by a three-judge panel at the General Court on Wednesday, November 22.
The dispute dates back to April 2015, when Swedish music company Toontrack Music filed a trademark application for the term ‘Ezmix’ in classes 9 (computer software, downloadable music files and music recordings), 15 (musical instruments) and 42 (design and development of computer software).
This was later changed to just classes 9 and 42 after the examiner had objected to the registration, in April 2015.
Nevertheless, the examiner rejected the application again, “with the exception of services in class 42 relating to cloud services”.
Toontrack appealed to the EUIPO in December 2015 and outlined why the application should be registered in both classes 9 and 42. However, this appeal was subsequently rejected by the Fifth Board of Appeal in July 2016.
The Board of Appeal stated that the application “did not concern goods and services as such, but the group of consumers for whom the goods and services were intended”.
It stated that the term ‘Ez’ was a shortened version of the word ‘easy’ and that ‘mix’ meant mixing music, so the application was merely descriptive.
The Board of Appeal also stated that the applied-for mark lacked the distinctive character required for registration.
Toontrack then asked the court to annul the decision and order the EUIPO to pay costs, but both requests were rejected by the panel.
“Although the word ‘easy’, as claimed by the appellant, may have several meanings and, for example, the pursuit of relaxation, it is sufficient to state that it is settled case law that a sign is not to be registered in accordance with article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No. 207/2009 when at least one of its possible meanings describes a property of the goods or services in question,” the opinion read.
The court added that the contested decision can’t be annulled because the mark applied for “is considered to be descriptive”, and ordered Toontrack to pay all costs.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.
Today’s top stories:
Musician refuses to let it go in copyright suit against Disney
Activision granted more time to oppose ‘Call of Doo Dee’ mark
