O/281/19 Revocation (DEVICE MARKS) – 23 May 2019
This decision is a good example of how the IPO approaches non-use challenges, and an insight into the economics of gift shops at public parks.
This decision is a good example of how the IPO approaches non-use challenges, and an insight into the economics of gift shops at public parks.
Old John is a Georgian folly and a Leicestershire landmark. Built in 1874, it is located in Bradgate Park, which is run by the Bradgate Park Trust. The Bradgate Park Trust registered various images of Old John as three trade marks. The first registration was to line drawings; the second to “textural designs”, the third to photographs. The marks were series marks. More recently, the Bradgate Park Trust sought to prevent local businesses from using images of Old John without paying a licence fee. Artists were also asked to pay for a licence to sell images of the landmark.
Local furore commenced, and one business applied to revoke the three marks for non-use. The counter statements did not defend the marks in every class, so some classes were revoked at an early stage. The decision considered here reviews the extent to which the marks should be revoked in respect of the remaining classes.
For some goods and services, although use was claimed, no sales figures were provided. So, for example, the failure to evidence sales of antlers or tea room services proved terminal.
For other goods, sales figures were provided for the seven-month period between April and October 2017. Not all such sales met the threshold; during that time, sales of thimbles totalled £2, which did not amount to genuine use. Neither would £16.80 worth of erasers or £17.00 of pencil sharpeners have sufficed. £234 of badges, however, did satisfy the Hearing Officer.
Some images of Old John used were too dissimilar to the registered marks to amount to genuine use, which was fatal to fridge magnets and restaurant services. However, the use in a badge containing other elements was found to be an acceptable variant.
The Hearing Officer quoted Mr Justice Arnold in London Taxi, noting that purely decorative use did not count; genuine use requires a mark be used to denote trade origin. In a passage one can imagine being cited by recipients of future requests for artistic licences, the Hearing Officer stated:
Photographs of landmarks (either in their original form or printed on to secondary goods), when they are clearly just photographs of landmarks, are likely to be viewed by the consumer as just an image being used for decorative purposes. The consumer is unlikely to view a photograph presented on goods commonly sold as souvenirs or mementos as indicative of trade origin.
Ultimately, the first and second registrations were entirely revoked. In relation to the third mark, the Hearing Officer considered what a fair specification would be given the goods and services which had been used. So, sales of venison could not support all of “meat, poultry and game, products made from meat, poultry and/or game” in class 29, and the specification was limited to “venison and products made from venison”.
This article was first published in the July issue of CITMA Review, the journal of the Chartered Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys (CITMA). For more information on CITMA, please click here.
Contact
Declan Cushley
Partner
declan.cushley@brownejacobson.com
+44 (0)20 796 53991
Related expertise
You may be interested in...
Guide
Devolution: a catalyst for long-term, positive change in local communities
Press Release
Law firm Browne Jacobson appointed to work alongside the Government Legal Department - the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs
Legal Update
Public matters - February 2023
Opinion
Can toilet facilities amount to sex discrimination?
Legal Update
Biodiversity Net Gain — Government publishes consultation response
Opinion
The Solicitors Regulation Authority has approval to take over from the Solicitors Indemnity Fund
Opinion
‘Awaab’s Law’- a significant amendment to the Social Housing Regulation Bill
Legal Update
Embargoed Judgments: A Professional Word of Caution
Legal Update
Procurement Bill debarment regime and ECHR issues
Published Article
Digital Twin Technologies: key legal contractual considerations
Guide
Public procurement: key facts and compliance considerations
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s real estate specialists advise Chesterfield Borough Council on prestigious new development - One Waterside Place
Opinion
Will fixed recoverable costs in housing conditions claims see the light of day?
Online Event
Register to join our Academy: to Register your interest in our next Academy
Press Release
Browne Jacobson’s intellectual property lawyers ranked experts in World Trademark Review guide 2023
Legal Update
Government introduces first Streamlined Subsidy Schemes under new regime
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advise High Peak Borough Council on future high street funded acquisition as part of Buxton regeneration vision
Opinion
Term-time school worker entitled to national minimum wage for unworked basic hours
Legal Update
Public matters - January 2023
Published Article
What are freeports and what benefits could they offer?
Legal Update
Dangerous Dogs
Published Article
Reaching Cloud Nine?
Legal Update
Unlawful delegation of decision-making powers
On-Demand
The Subsidy Control Act 2022. Putting the new regime into practice
Published Article
How the Environment Act affects existing contracts’
Opinion
Litigation in 2023 – Reforms on the horizon
Legal Update
Public matters - December 2022
Opinion
Is over centralisation hindering economic growth?
Legal Update
Protecting children and their data in the online environment
Press Release
Browne Jacobson helps launch new innovative council company network with Wiltshire Council and Christ Church Business School
Law firm Browne Jacobson has collaborated with Wiltshire Council and Christ Church Business School on the launch event of The Council Company Best Practice and Innovation Network, a platform which brings together academic experts and senior local authority leaders, allowing them to share best practice in relation to council companies.
Legal Update
Public Matters - November 2022
Legal Update
Dipping in and out of the Investment Zones
Announced in September but scrapped on 17 November the investment zone proposals were very short lived. The proposal has now morphed into the proposal for a smaller number of clustered zones earmarked for investment.
Legal Update
Settlement agreements – what are the limitations?
Settlement agreements are commonplace in an employment context and are ordinarily used to provide the parties to the agreement with certainty following the conclusion of an employment relationship.
Legal Update
Hillside – the end of drop in applications?
On 2 November 2022, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the much awaiting case of Hillside Parks Ltd v Snowdonia National Park Authority [2022] UKSC 30. The Court’s judgment suggests that the long established practice of using drop-in applications is in fact much more restricted than previously thought. This judgment therefore has significant implications for both the developers and local planning authorities.
Published Article
Local authority duties: Up in the air
In ‘failure to remove’ claims, the claimant alleges abuse in the family home and asserts that the local authority should have known about the abuse and/or that they should have removed the claimant from the family home and into care earlier.
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advises Bromley Council on the first social housing initiative of its kind to tackle homelessness
Across the UK, homelessness is an urgent crisis, and one that is set to grow amid the rising cost of living. Local authorities are at the forefront of responding to this crisis, but with a lack of properties that are suitable for social housing across the UK, vulnerable individuals and families are often housed in temporary accommodation.
Legal Update
Five “takeaways” in claims against mortgage brokers following Taylor v Legal & General Partnership Services Ltd [2022] EWHC 2475 (Ch)
Claims arising from interest-only mortgages have been farmed in volume. Many such claims to date have sought to drive a narrative that interest-only mortgages are an inherently toxic product and brokers were negligent simply for suggesting them. Taylor is a helpful recalibration, focussing instead on what the monies raised by the mortgage product were being used for and whether the client understood the inherent risks.
Opinion
The Future of Mediation
Opinion
Directors fined for unsafe removal of asbestos
Two directors of a construction company were fined after failing to ensure the safe removal of asbestos from a plot of land. On 14 and 15 November 2021, Directors Anthony Sumner and Neil Brown, of Waterbarn Limited were involved in the uncontrolled removal of asbestos material from a plot of land in Grasscroft, Oldham.
Opinion
Don't look down
An engineering company in Tyne and Wear was fined £20,000 after a worker fractured his pelvis and suffered internal injuries after falling through a petrol station forecourt canopy, whilst he was replacing the guttering.