Swedish company hit with second General Court TM rejection
For the second time in eight days, the EU General Court has backed the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in rejecting a trademark application from Swedish music company Toontrack.
The latest rejection was handed down by a three-judge panel on Thursday, November 30.
It came after Toontrack filed a trademark application in April 2015 for ‘Superior Drummer’ in class 9, for music composition software, and class 42, for the design and development of music software and cloud software.
In November 2015, this was rejected by the EUIPO with the exception of cloud computing services in class 42.
The examiner noted that “other than cloud computing services, the mark applied for was descriptive”.
A month later Toontrack filed an appeal, which was also rejected by the Fifth Board of Appeal of the EUIPO.
“The Board of Appeal found in essence that the mark meant ‘talented drummer’ and that the sign was descriptive within the meaning of that provision in respect of all the goods and services,” the General Court ruling read.
It added: “The relevant public would have come to the conclusion that, with the exception of cloud computing services, those goods and services were intended for talented drummers.”
Toontrack then appealed against this decision, asking the EU General Court to annul the ruling and order the EUIPO to pay all costs.
But the General Court also said the mark was descriptive and devoid of distinctive character, except for cloud computing services, and ordered Toontrack to pay all costs.
It tops off an unsuccessful week at the General Court for the Swedish company, which also had its application for ‘Ezmix’ dismissed for the same reasons on November 22.
“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,” that ruling said.
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:
Disney tackles DVD kiosk company over illegal film codes
Sazerac settles bourbon trademark dispute
BlackBerry ‘accepts’ $157m patent payment to Nokia
INTA Berlin 2017: Sustainability essential, claims Fjällräven officer
INTA Berlin 2017: No rush expected for EU certification regime
