THE ADVOCATE GENERAL ADVISES ON THE SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF THE IP TRANSLATOR JUDGMENT – THE CASE “Lambretta” – C 577/14 P
29/09/2016

Is the burden of precise indication of protected products and services confined to the trade mark application or does it also concern marks that have already been registered at the time of the famous judgment of the Court of Justice? In the context of a dispute concerning forfeiture for a five year period of non-use of the Community mark “Lambretta”, rigid application of the above mentioned principles was requested and not only with respect to trade mark applications but also for marks already registered at the time of the aforesaid decision. Within case C-577/14, the Advocate General has now expressed his doubts as to the applicability of the principles in the described context.


With decision dated 24 September 2010, the Cancellation Division of the EUIPO declared partial forfeiture for a five year period of non-use of the mark “Lambretta” for products falling within, among other things, class 12 of the Niece classification. The title of this class includes, according to the Niece Classification, «Vehicles; terrestrial, aerial and nautical locomotion devices» and does not expressly include spare parts for these products. The petition against said decision was not successful (with reference to products falling within class 12): the Petition Commission considered actual use of the “Lambretta” mark for products of class 12 to be insufficiently proved and held the proffered evidence for use of the mark with respect to spare parts (for products falling within said class) to be irrelevant. This was because the spare parts, not expressly claimed with the trade mark application, would not fall within the objective scope of protection on the basis of the principles of IP Translator judgment.

The decision of the Petition Commission was appealed with a cancellation petition before the Tribunal: it was said that the Commission wrongly included the spare parts in the forfeiture declaration, where said spare parts would fall within the scope of protection in accordance with the so-called “inclusive criterion”. Based on such criterion, if a trade mark application for registration mentions – as was the case here – without distinction, the goods indicated in the title of a class, protection concerns all products of the alphabetical list of goods and services falling within such class.

The decision of the Petition Commission was overruled by the Tribunal which had excluded the applicability of the principles deriving from the IP Translator decision. Also the decision of the Tribunal was appealed by the party who had interest in the forfeiture of the mark and the proceedings are now pending before the Court of Justice (C-577/14). The Advocate General, who recently filed his conclusions, believes that it is not possible to transpose sic et simpliciter  the IP Translator judgment, which concerned a trade mark application, to the case of a situation in which the mark was already registered and therefore proposes to reject the petition. Correctly, the EUIPO applied the “inclusive criterion” for imperative needs of legal certainty, a principle integrated in the legal system of the European Union.

The proposal of the Advocate General seems to have been determined by the new art. 28, para. 8, of the European Union trade mark regulation that granted owner of already registered EU trade mark the option of presenting a declaration to the EUIPO by 24 September 2016 in order to specify definitevly the scope of protection.


CORTE UE: LA VENDITA DI COMPUTER CON SOFTWARE PREINSTALLATO NON COSTITUISCE DI PER SE’ UNA PRATICA COMMERCIALE SLEALE

20/09/2016

La CGE, con la decisione relativa alla causa C-310/15 depositata il 7 settembre 2016, ha stabilito che la vendita di un pc con un sistema operativo preinstallato non è contraria alle norme di diligenza professionale e, soprattutto, non falsa il comportamento economico dei consumatori. Non costituisce una pratica commerciale ingannevole neppure la mancata indicazione del prezzo di ciascuno dei programmi preinstallati.


 

Con la richiamata decisione la Corte ha posto fine ad una vicenda iniziata nel 2008 in Francia, quando un consumatore acquistò un computer Sony già provvisto del sistema operativo Windows Vista: al momento del primo utilizzo, l’acquirente rifiutò di sottoscrivere il contratto di licenza del programma software chiedendo alla Sony il rimborso della quota corrispondente al costo del programma preinstallato. La Sony respinse la richiesta del cliente, proponendo invece di annullare la vendita rimborsandogli l’intero prezzo d’acquisto. La controversia giunse fino alla Corte di Cassazione Francese la quale rimise la questione ai giudici UE, al fine di ottenere chiarimenti in ordine alla direttiva 2005/29 sulle pratiche commerciali sleali delle imprese nei confronti dei consumatori nel mercato interno.

I giudici europei hanno sentenziato che la vendita di un computer provvisto di programmi informatici preinstallati non costituisce, di per sé, una pratica commerciale sleale, dal momento che un’offerta di questo tipo non è contraria alle norme di diligenza professionale e non falsa il comportamento economico dei consumatori. Nel caso di specie, precisa la Corte, emerge che “la vendita da parte di Sony di computer provvisti di programmi informatici preinstallati risponde, come rileva l’indagine di mercato connessa, alle aspettative di gran parte dei consumatori, i quali preferiscono l’acquisto di un computer provvisto di programmi preinstallati e di uso immediato all’acquisto separato del computer e dei programmi informatici”. I giudici del Corte di Giustizia hanno precisato che sarà in ogni caso compito del giudice nazionale valutare se il consumatore è stato correttamente informato, prima dell’acquisto, del fatto che il modello di computer è venduto con programmi informatici preinstallati. Nel caso esaminato, la Sony ha correttamente rispettato le norme di diligenza professionale avendo offerto la possibilità di recedere dalla vendita.

Per quanto riguarda la seconda questione, la Corte ha riconosciuto che la mancata indicazione del prezzo dei programmi preinstallati non è né tale da impedire al consumatore di prendere una decisione consapevole di natura commerciale né idonea ad indurlo a prendere una decisione di natura commerciale che non avrebbe altrimenti preso. Peraltro, siccome il prezzo di tali programmi non costituisce un’informazione rilevante che il venditore è tenuto a fornire all’acquirente, la mancata indicazione del prezzo di ciascuno dei programmi informatici preinstallati non può essere considerata una pratica commerciale ingannevole.


DECISION OF THE EURUPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE: THE SALE OF COMPUTERS WITH PRE-INSTALLED SOFTWARE DOES NOT OF ITSELF CONSTITUTE AN UNFAIR COMMERCIAL PRACTICE

20/09/2016

The CJEU, with judgment C-310/15 filed on 7 September 2016, has decided that the sale of a pc that comes with a pre-installed operative system does not contravene the norms on professional ethics and, especially, does not distort the economic behavior of consumers. Additionally, the Court held that omitting the price of each of the pre-installed programs does not amount to an unfair commercial practice.


 

With the above mentioned judgment the Court put an end to a sequence of events that started in France in 2008, when a consumer purchased a Sony computer that came with a Windows Vista operating system: upon using the software for the first time, the purchaser refused to enter into the software license agreement, requesting that Sony refund the price of the pre-installed program. Sony rejected the request of the client, and instead proposed to annul the complete purchase and refund the entire price. The dispute reached the French Supreme Court, which decided to remand the issue to the EU judges, in order to obtain clarifications concerning directive 2005/29 on unfair commercial practices of corporations in their relations with consumers of the internal market.

The European judges held that the sale of a computer having pre-installed computer programs does not, of itself, amount to an unfair commercial practice, considering that an offer of this type does not contravene the norms on professional diligence and does not distort the economic behavior of consumers. In the case at hand, the Court observed that “as noted by the connected market survey, the sale by Sony of computers having pre-installed computer programs meets the expectations of the vast majority of consumers, who prefer the purchase of a computer having such software pre-installed and immediately utilizable as opposed to purchasing separately the computer and the programs”. The judges of the Court of Justice stated that, in any case, it is the duty of the national judge to evaluate whether the consumer has been properly informed, before the purchase, of the fact that a given model of computer is sold with pre-installed programs. In the case under scrutiny, Sony had conformed to the norms on professional diligence, having provided the consumer with the option of receding from the sale.

As concerns the second question, the Court held that the omission of the prices of the pre-installed programs does not prevent the consumer from making an informed commercial decision nor does it provoke him or her to make a commercial decision that he or she would not have taken otherwise. Indeed, considering that the price of these programs does constitute relevant information which the vendor is obliged to give to the purchaser, the failure to indicate the price of each of the pre-installed computer programs cannot be considered an unfair commercial practice.


SIMONA LAVAGNINI INTERVIENE AL CONVEGNO VALORIZZARE, GESTIRE E DIFENDERE LA PROPRIETA’ INTELLETTUALE

19/09/2016

Il prossimo 27 settembre 2016 Simona Lavagnini parteciperà alla tavola rotonda “Valorizzare, gestire e difendere la Proprietà Intellettuale” organizzata da “The ruling companies association” presso il Centro Congressi Assolombarda di Milano.


 

L’incontro è finalizzato a fornire alle piccole e medie imprese italiane, da sempre fortemente creative e innovative, le informazioni e gli strumenti necessari per valorizzare e proteggere le proprie idee. L’avv. Lavagnini si confronterà con gli altri partecipanti raccontando la propria esperienza professionale che da anni la vede al fianco delle aziende tecnologiche, fornendo valido supporto dalla fase di sviluppo delle idee sino alla fase di registrazione e tutela degli assets IP.

Per informazioni ed iscrizioni http://rulingcompanies.org/incontro/valorizzare-gestire-difendere-la-proprieta-intellettuale/


SIMONA LAVAGNINI AT THE SEMINAR ON VALORIZING, MANAGING AND DEFENDING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

19/09/2016

Next 27 September 2016 Ms. Simona Lavagnini will participate at the round table discussion “Valorizing, managing and defending Intellectual Property” organized by “The ruling companies association”. The event will be held at the Lombardy Industrial Association Congress in Milan.


 

The meeting is intended to provide small and medium sized Italian companies, known to be highly creative and innovative, with the necessary information and instruments to valorize and protect their ideas. Ms. Lavagnini will engage with the other participants and will speak of her own extensive professional experience in assisting technology companies, providing support in the development phase of ideas as well as in the stage involving registration and protection of IP assets.

Information and registrations at http://rulingcompanies.org/incontro/valorizzare-gestire-difendere-la-proprieta-intellettuale/