{"title":"ZAŠTITA GEOGRAFSKIH OZNAKA JAKIH ALKOHOLNIH PIĆA","authors":"S. Lučić","doi":"10.46793/gp.0902.043l","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) published an interesting judgement in Case C-44/17. Following the action initiated in Germany by the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA), the Court of Hamburg had asked the CJEU to interpret EU legislation on GIs spirit drinks (Regulation (EC) No 110/2008), in particular with respect to the depth of \"evocation\". The case opposes the SWA and a distillery located in Germany, which produces and markets whisky under the designation \"Glen Buchenbach\". The product’s label also indicates “German product”. The SWA considers that the use of the term \"Glen\", in connection with whisky, infringes the GI \"Scotch Whisky\" as it is liable to cause consumers to make an inappropriate connection to the GI. “Glen” in fact is widely used in Scotland to refer to “valley” and is an element of the trade mark of Scotch Whisky producers. With respect to the concept of evocation, which is a powerful tool to protect GIs against the exploitation of their reputation and other practices which aim at establishing a connection between the products sold and GIs, the main elements of the judgement are: The “conceptual” proximity between a GI and the contested name can result in an evocation. This has to be evaluated by national courts, taking into account the fact that an average European consumer, who is reasonably well informed and observant and circumspect, when confronted with the name at issue, the image triggered in his mind is that of the product whose indication is protected. This is the first case which puts it beyond doubt that evocation can exist even where the name at issue is not similar phonetically or visually to the GI. The indication of the true origin of the good at issue does not exclude automatically the evocation of a GI. As a result, in the present case, the German court will have to determine whether an average European consumer thinks directly about the GI “Scotch Whisky” when he is confronted with a comparable product bearing the name “Glen” (“Glen Buchenbach” whisky).","PeriodicalId":399228,"journal":{"name":"Glasnik prava","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Glasnik prava","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46793/gp.0902.043l","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) published an interesting judgement in Case C-44/17. Following the action initiated in Germany by the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA), the Court of Hamburg had asked the CJEU to interpret EU legislation on GIs spirit drinks (Regulation (EC) No 110/2008), in particular with respect to the depth of "evocation". The case opposes the SWA and a distillery located in Germany, which produces and markets whisky under the designation "Glen Buchenbach". The product’s label also indicates “German product”. The SWA considers that the use of the term "Glen", in connection with whisky, infringes the GI "Scotch Whisky" as it is liable to cause consumers to make an inappropriate connection to the GI. “Glen” in fact is widely used in Scotland to refer to “valley” and is an element of the trade mark of Scotch Whisky producers. With respect to the concept of evocation, which is a powerful tool to protect GIs against the exploitation of their reputation and other practices which aim at establishing a connection between the products sold and GIs, the main elements of the judgement are: The “conceptual” proximity between a GI and the contested name can result in an evocation. This has to be evaluated by national courts, taking into account the fact that an average European consumer, who is reasonably well informed and observant and circumspect, when confronted with the name at issue, the image triggered in his mind is that of the product whose indication is protected. This is the first case which puts it beyond doubt that evocation can exist even where the name at issue is not similar phonetically or visually to the GI. The indication of the true origin of the good at issue does not exclude automatically the evocation of a GI. As a result, in the present case, the German court will have to determine whether an average European consumer thinks directly about the GI “Scotch Whisky” when he is confronted with a comparable product bearing the name “Glen” (“Glen Buchenbach” whisky).
欧洲联盟法院(CJEU)在C-44/17号案件中发表了一项有趣的判决。继苏格兰威士忌协会(SWA)在德国发起的行动之后,汉堡法院要求欧洲法院解释欧盟关于苏格兰威士忌酒的立法(法规(EC) No 110/2008),特别是关于“唤起”的深度。该案件反对SWA和一家位于德国的酿酒厂,该酒厂以“Glen Buchenbach”的名称生产和销售威士忌。产品的标签上也注明“德国产品”。SWA认为,使用“Glen”一词与威士忌有关,侵犯了地理标志“苏格兰威士忌”,因为它容易使消费者与地理标志产生不适当的联系。事实上,“Glen”在苏格兰被广泛用于指代“山谷”,是苏格兰威士忌生产商商标的一个元素。唤起概念是保护地理标志免受利用其声誉和其他旨在建立所售产品与地理标志之间联系的做法的有力工具,关于这一概念,判断的主要要素是:地理标志与争议名称之间的“概念”接近可能导致唤起。这必须由国家法院进行评估,考虑到这样一个事实,即一个普通的欧洲消费者,他们相当了解情况,观察和谨慎,当面对有争议的名称时,他脑海中引发的形象是其标志受到保护的产品。这是第一个案例,它毫无疑问地表明,即使有争议的名称在语音或视觉上与地理标志不相似,也可以存在唤起。指明争议商品的真实来源并不自动排除对地理标志的唤起。因此,在本案中,德国法院将不得不确定,当普通欧洲消费者面对一种带有“Glen”(“Glen Buchenbach”威士忌)名称的类似产品时,他是否会直接想到地理标志“苏格兰威士忌”。