“mk advokaten”Decision of the European Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) 2 July 2020 – Case No. C-684/19 (ECLI:EU:C:2020:519)

被引：0

作者：

机构：

来源：

IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law | 2020年 / 51卷

关键词：

Use in the course of trade of a sign that is identical with or similar to another person’s trade mark; Scope of the term “using”; Advertisement placed on a website by order of a person operating in the course of trade and subsequently reproduced on other websites; Liability;

D O I：

暂无

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Article 5(1) of Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that a person operating in the course of trade that has arranged for an advertisement which infringes another person’s trade mark to be placed on a website is not using a sign which is identical with that trade mark where the operators of other websites reproduce that advertisement by placing it online, on their own initiative and in their own name, on other websites.

引用

页码：1006 / 1006

共 50 条

[1] "mk advokaten" Decision of the European Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) 2 July 2020-Case No. C-684/19 (ECLI:EU:C:2020:519)
不详
[J]. IIC-INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COMPETITION LAW, 2020, 51 (8) : 1006 - 1006
[2] “Papierfabriek Doetinchem”Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Tenth Chamber) 2 March 2023 – Case No. C-684/21; ECLI:EU:C:2023:141
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2023, 54 : 797 - 797
[3] "Papierfabriek Doetinchem" Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Tenth Chamber) 2 March 2023 Case No. C-684/21; ECLI:EU:C:2023:141
不详
[J]. IIC-INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COMPETITION LAW, 2023, 54 (05) : 797 - 797
[4] "Aktiebolaget ostgotatrafiken" Decision of the European Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) 8 October 2020-Case No. C-456/19; ECLI:EU:C:2020:813
不详
[J]. IIC-INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COMPETITION LAW, 2021, 52 (01) : 69 - 69
[5] “Aktiebolaget Östgötatrafiken”Decision of the European Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) 8 October 2020 – Case No. C-456/19; ECLI:EU:C:2020:813
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2021, 52 : 69 - 69
[6] “Santen”Decision of the European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) 9 July 2020 – Case No. C-673/18 (ECLI:EU:C:2020:531)
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2020, 51 (7) : 878 - 878
[7] “Constantin Film Verleih”Decision of the European Court of Justice (Fifth Chamber) 9 July 2020 – Case No. C-264/19 (ECLI:EU:C:2020:542)
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2020, 51 (7) : 888 - 888
[8] “Facebook Ireland and Schrems”Decision of the European Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) 16 July 2020 – Case No. C-311/18 (ECLI:EU:C:2020:559)
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2020, 51 (7) : 901 - 902
[9] “Gömböc”Decision of the European Court of Justice (Fifth Chamber) 23 April 2020 – Case No. C-237/19 (ECLI:EU:C:2020:296)
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2020, 51 (5) : 666 - 667
[10] “BY (Preuve photographique)”Decision of the European Court of Justice (Fifth Chamber) 28 October 2020 – Case No. C-637/19; ECLI:EU:C:2020:863
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2021, 52 : 224 - 224

← 1 2 3 4 5 →