Promotioneel vocabulaire

Gerecht EU, 3 maart 2010, zaak T-321/07, Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten GmbH tegen OHIM / Applus Servicios Tecnológicos, SL

Gemeenschapsmerk. Oppositieprocedure o.g.v. ouder Gemeenschapswoordmerk AirPlus International tegen aanvraag beeldmerk A+. Oppositie afgewezen, geen verwarringsgevaar.

40. The Board of Appeal rightly found that there was a low degree of conceptual similarity between the signs at issue. Admittedly, both contain the concept ‘plus’, although it is represented differently in them, in particular in the form of the sign ‘+’ in the mark applied for.

41. However, as is apparent from paragraph 20 of the contested decision, that concept occurs in many trade marks and is part of the promotional vocabulary that any undertaking is entitled to use.

42. Therefore, the concept ‘plus’ cannot be monopolised and no opposition is likely to succeed simply because the marks at issue both refer to the word ‘plus’ or to the sign ‘+’.

43. Furthermore, in the light of the significant differences between the signs at issue, which means that they are dissimilar, the Court considers that the Board of Appeal rightly found that it was not necessary to determine whether the goods were similar. The lack of similarity between the signs is sufficient to rule out any likelihood of confusion.

Lees het arrest hier.