ARTICLE
15 January 2018

Portrait Photograph Deserves Trade Mark Protection

VB
Van Bael & Bellis

Contributor

Van Bael & Bellis is a leading independent law firm based in Brussels, with a second office in Geneva dedicated to WTO matters. The firm is well known for its deep expertise in EU competition law, international trade law, EU regulatory law, as well as corporate and commercial law. With nearly 70 lawyers coming from 20 different countries, Van Bael & Bellis offers clients the support of a highly effective team of professionals with multi-jurisdictional expertise and an international perspective.
On 16 November 2017, the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office reversed the EUIPO examiner's refusal to register a portrait photograph of the Dutch model Maartje Verhoef as an EUTM for a large number of products and services.
European Union Intellectual Property

On 16 November 2017, the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (the "EUIPO Board of Appeal") reversed the EUIPO examiner's refusal to register a portrait photograph of the Dutch model Maartje Verhoef as a European Union Trade Mark ("EUTM") for a large number of products and services.

According to the EUIPO examiner, a portrait photograph of a woman (i) has no inherently distinctive character since it does not differ from other portrait photographs of other women; and (ii) has a descriptive character in so far as that picture merely describes the category of consumers for which the goods are intended (i.e., women) and in so far as the picture represents the model or the fashion designer. In relation to other goods and services, the examiner held that the sign lacks any distinctive character and does not allow for the distinction of the goods and services of the applicant from those of another commercial origin.

Upon appeal by Ms. Verhoef, the EUIPO Board of Appeal overturned the examiner's decision holding that the photograph clearly depicted one particular woman and that the relevant public would not perceive that photograph as a direct link to the target audience (i.e., women) since there are also female fashion designers that design collections for men, and vice versa. Furthermore, the EUIPO Board of Appeal rejected the reasoning of the examiner that the portrait merely represents the person providing the services in question and thus found the portrait photograph to have sufficient distinctive character to qualify for trade mark protection. In other words, according to the EUIPO Board of Appeal, the photograph can be perceived as an indication of the commercial origin of these goods and/or services since a portrait photograph is a unique representation of a person. Consequently, such a photograph inherently has the capacity to fulfil the essential function of a trade mark, which is to distinguish the products for which registration is sought from those of another commercial origin.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More