In a very fundamental decision about the Heineken Music agenda, the Advertising Board of Appeal made its very first statement: the rightful claimant should turn to the civil court to claim his right in trademark- and copyright infringement matters. Only if matters are crystal clear, without any trace of doubt, the Advertising Code Committee can rule a decision. A heavy burden of proof lies on the shoulders of the trademark holder or copyright owner. The same applies to claims based on tort.
Only the 'common' legal rules that apply to everyone in the same way (‘regulatory rules') such as the Food and Commodities Act and deception are the responsibility of the Advertising Code under Article 2 NRC (contrary to the law).
MOJO concert organizer objected to the use of pictures and names of artists such as U2's in the digital music www.heinekenmusic.nl agenda. Mojo wished to file a complaint with the Advertising Code Committee based on its trademark rights and the rights of portrait of these artists. But the Committee has considerable doubt whether the trade mark rights are violated. The artists made their own pictures widely available as well. The website is not misleading either.
It is the large amount of events and the readable disclaimer which makes it sufficiently clear for the average Internet consumer that Heineken does not subsequently sponsors all occurring events. There is no unfair competition.
This case is an important guideline for the Advertising Code Commission in complex trademark and copyright matters. The proprietor must think carefully where and with whom he wants to get his right.
This case was handled for Heineken by Ebba Hoogenraad and Maarten Haak.
|
office Emerald House Jozef Israëlskade 48-G Amsterdam, the Netherlands t +31 (0)20 - 305 3066 www.hoogenhaak.nl |
post PO Box 76780 1070 KB Amsterdam e info@hoogenhaak.nl f +31 (0)20 - 305 3069 chamber of commerce 34314579 |
In a very fundamental decision about the Heineken Music agenda, the Advertising Board of Appeal made its very first statement: the rightful claimant should turn to the civil court to claim his right in trademark- and copyright infringement matters. Only if matters are crystal clear, without any trace of doubt, the Advertising Code Committee can rule a decision. A heavy burden of proof lies on the shoulders of the trademark holder or copyright owner. The same applies to claims based on tort.
Only the 'common' legal rules that apply to everyone in the same way (‘regulatory rules') such as the Food and Commodities Act and deception are the responsibility of the Advertising Code under Article 2 NRC (contrary to the law).
MOJO concert organizer objected to the use of pictures and names of artists such as U2's in the digital music www.heinekenmusic.nl agenda. Mojo wished to file a complaint with the Advertising Code Committee based on its trademark rights and the rights of portrait of these artists. But the Committee has considerable doubt whether the trade mark rights are violated. The artists made their own pictures widely available as well. The website is not misleading either.
It is the large amount of events and the readable disclaimer which makes it sufficiently clear for the average Internet consumer that Heineken does not subsequently sponsors all occurring events. There is no unfair competition.
This case is an important guideline for the Advertising Code Commission in complex trademark and copyright matters. The proprietor must think carefully where and with whom he wants to get his right.
This case was handled for Heineken by Ebba Hoogenraad and Maarten Haak.