每人熟悉的阿迪達斯 “三道杠”標識,被歐盟法院判決為無效商標。理由是該商標缺少特點......這難道是要換標志的意思?
圖片來源:視覺中國
?
英文原文音頻:
The?European Union General Court on Wednesday ruled against Adidas' claim that its famous three stripes, applied in any direction, deserve trademark protection.?
歐盟普通法院周三判阿迪達斯敗訴。阿迪達斯稱其著名的任意方向的三條杠應受法律保護。
The ruling dealt a blow to a sports apparel giant that famously polices other companies and designers for any possible infringement on its logo.
這項判決對阿迪達斯導致了緊急的打擊。這家運動服飾飾巨頭出了名地監督其他公司和設計師,預防任何一點可能侵犯其logo的行為。
The high court judgment upheld a 2016 decision from the European Union Intellectual Property Office, which dismissed Adidas' 2014 trademark application after determining the logo was "devoid?of any distinctive character."
高等法院保持了2016年歐盟常識產權局的決定,也就是在決定商標“缺少任何獨特質”后,駁回了阿迪達斯2014年的商標申請。
Similarly, the General Court said the German company could not prove that the stripes had a distinctive enough character throughout the 28-nation trade bloc. "The mark is not a pattern mark composed of a series of regularly repetitive elements, but an ordinary?figurative?mark," the court said in a statement.?
類似的,普通法院稱這家德國公司沒辦法證明三條杠在28國貿易集團中具備足夠的獨特質。“這個標志不是由一系列規律的重復元素構成的圖案,而是普通的形象標志。”法院在一項聲明中說道。
Adidas said it is disappointed in the ruling and is considering its next options.
阿迪達斯稱其對判決十分失望,正在考慮下一步選擇。
It's a rare loss for the sports apparel company, which has earned a tough reputation among competitors and fashion designers for aggressively litigating against anyone who has used stripes in their collections.
對于這家運動服飾飾公司來講,敗訴是非常罕見的。阿迪達斯在角逐對手和服飾設計師中以強硬著稱,對任何在服飾中用條紋的人提起訴訟。
New York designer Thom Browne switched the number of stripes from three to four in his signature line of grey suits after he was sued by the sportswear company.?
在遭到這家運動服飾飾公司起訴后,紐約設計師湯姆·布朗將他經典灰色西裝上的三條杠改成了四條。
Adidas also exchanged blows with footwear brand Skechers. After partially winning a lawsuit in May 2018 over a Stan Smith tennis shoe lookalike, Adidas continued to notify Skechers over trademark violations throughout the year, leading Skechers to file acountersuit?in late 2018, reported the Fashion Law website.
阿迪達斯也和鞋類品牌斯凱奇互毆過。在2018年5月,阿迪達斯在Stan Smith網球鞋仿品的訴訟中部分勝訴,之后一整年阿迪達斯又繼續警告斯凱奇侵犯商標權。這使得斯凱奇在2018年年末提出反訴,時裝法網站報道說。
?
今日語言點
?
1)devoid?adj. 缺少,沒
容易見到使用方法:devoid of sth. 沒…的;缺少…的
I have never looked on a face that was so devoid of feeling.
我從沒見過這樣面無表情的臉。
She is devoid of all pretence.
她一點也不做作。
?
2)figurative?adj.比喻的;象征的
in a figurative sense 從比喻意義上來講
figurative painting(寫實畫)&? abstract painting(抽象畫)?
文中figurative mark,指圖形商標。
?3)countersuit?反訴counter-有反用途力的意味:
譬如counteract,v. 抵消;中和
譬如counterattack,v. 反擊
又譬如counteroffer,n. 買方還價
?