Jack & James Jones

Gerecht, 23 februari 2010, zaak T-11/09, Rahmi Özdemir tegen OHIM / Aktieselskabet af 21. november 2001

Gemeenschapsmerk. Oppositieprocedure o.g.v. eerder Gemeenschapswoordmerk JACK & JONES tegen aanvraag Gemeenschapswoordmerk JAMES JONES (kleding). Oppositie toegewezen. Verwarringsgevaar. Het is “conceivable that consumers might interpret the marks at issue as referring to the same person.”

34. (…) Jack and James will be recognised by the consumers of most Member States as being common English forenames. The surname Jones will also be recognised by a large proportion of the relevant public as being a common English surname. Thus, as the Board of Appeal stated, both marks at issue refer to people’s names and contain the surname Jones. The Board of Appeal was therefore correct to find that it was conceivable that consumers might interpret the marks at issue as referring to the same person, and that the presence of the ampersand symbol did not exclude all conceptual similarity between the signs.

35. That finding is not called into question by the applicant’s argument that the marks are not conceptually similar in that the JACK & JONES trade mark will be perceived as the surnames of two people, linked by an ampersand, whereas the James Jones mark will be perceived as the forename and surname of one person only.

36. As the Board of Appeal and OHIM point out, even if the JACK & JONES trade mark were understood as being composed of two surnames, the lack of a forename associated with the surname Jones in that mark reinforces the similarity with the James Jones mark. Thus, it is conceivable that the relevant public might take the marks at issue to refer to the same person.

37. The Board of Appeal was correct to find that the James Jones mark for which registration is sought and the earlier trade mark JACK & JONES were similar visually and phonetically and relatively similar conceptually. It must therefore be held that those marks are similar overall.

Lees het arrest hier.