The Registered Community Design (RCD) for the CROCS Cayman is not valid. This decision by the OHIM cancellation devision was recently upheld by the OHIM Board of Appeal. The reason: the design had been public for more than a year before it was registered. The novelty requirement is strictly applied. In this case photos of the Cayman clug had been placed on a .com website, the model had been showed at a trade fair in the USA and some 10.000 pairs had been sold - all between 12 and 7 months before the relevant date (one year before the application). The Board held that each circumstance in itsel is detrimental to novelty:
"The test is whether the sales could have reasonably become known to the relevant circles in the Community. And the answer is, in the Board's estimation, in the affirmative. The launch of a new product on the marketplace always attracts attention from the public at large, the press and the business circles. This sort of news circulates instantly and easily in the Internet era.”
Crocs will probably find its way up to the Court of Justice. Crocs is one of the IP owners that always acts against look-alikes. With a focussed campaign Crocs could sell its Cayman clug quite well. Nevertheless, the turnaround seemed to have come with some (for Crocs) disappointing judgments against a.o. Makro, where also the scope of protection under copyright law proved to be rather slim. That look alike could freely be sold. But Crocs are not free for all yet. Highly identical copies can be attacked based on copyright and the 'slavish imitation' doctrine (unfair competition). Yet the scope of protection will be limited. This summer we will see many foam clugs in the local retailers.
Maarten Haak, design lawyer
|
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 |
The Registered Community Design (RCD) for the CROCS Cayman is not valid. This decision by the OHIM cancellation devision was recently upheld by the OHIM Board of Appeal. The reason: the design had been public for more than a year before it was registered. The novelty requirement is strictly applied. In this case photos of the Cayman clug had been placed on a .com website, the model had been showed at a trade fair in the USA and some 10.000 pairs had been sold - all between 12 and 7 months before the relevant date (one year before the application). The Board held that each circumstance in itsel is detrimental to novelty:
"The test is whether the sales could have reasonably become known to the relevant circles in the Community. And the answer is, in the Board's estimation, in the affirmative. The launch of a new product on the marketplace always attracts attention from the public at large, the press and the business circles. This sort of news circulates instantly and easily in the Internet era.”
Crocs will probably find its way up to the Court of Justice. Crocs is one of the IP owners that always acts against look-alikes. With a focussed campaign Crocs could sell its Cayman clug quite well. Nevertheless, the turnaround seemed to have come with some (for Crocs) disappointing judgments against a.o. Makro, where also the scope of protection under copyright law proved to be rather slim. That look alike could freely be sold. But Crocs are not free for all yet. Highly identical copies can be attacked based on copyright and the 'slavish imitation' doctrine (unfair competition). Yet the scope of protection will be limited. This summer we will see many foam clugs in the local retailers.
Maarten Haak, design lawyer