| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font

Show document

Title:PRIMERJALNA REKLAMA IN KRŠITEV ZNAMKE
Authors:ID Gorenjak, Nuša (Author)
ID Repas, Martina (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf MAG_Gorenjak_Nusa_2016.pdf (1,14 MB)
MD5: 6742C766AC5791A2BDACB83123D7524C
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Master's thesis/paper (mb22)
Typology:2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:Področje reklame je v Evropski uniji pomembno, saj vpliva na vzpostavitev notranjega trga, kar je ključni cilj Evropske unije. Reklama lahko močno vpliva tudi na stališča ljudi in njihovo dojemanje, zato je ključna njena pravna ureditev. Primerjalna reklama je reklama, kjer so storitve oziroma proizvodi enega proizvajalca primerjani s storitvami oziroma proizvodi drugega. Primerjalna reklama je pravno urejena v Direktivi 2006/114/EC. Pri uporabi primerjalne reklame lahko pride do nelojalne konkurence ali pa kršitve znamke. Vsebina magistrskega dela je osredotočena predvsem na področje kršitve znamke, kot posledice uporabe tuje znamke v primerjalnem oglaševanju. Zaradi prepletanja primerjalnega oglaševanja in prava blagovnih znamk, je pomembna tudi Direktiva 2008/95/ES, ki ureja področje blagovnih znamk. Decembra 2015 je bila sprejeta Direktiva (EU) 2015/2436, ki je nadomestila Direktivo 2008/95/ES. Njeni pravni učinki bodo vidni šele po letu 2019, ko se izteče implementacijski rok. Cilj Direktive 2015/2436 je predvsem razviti in vzpostaviti dobro delujoč notranji trg ter olajšati registracijo, upravljanje in varstvo blagovne znamke v Evropske uniji. V praksi je prišlo do nejasnosti glede medsebojnega razmerja med primerjalnim oglaševanjem in blagovnimi znamkami, vendar tudi teorija ni imela točno zapisanega razmerja. Rešitev je podala sodna praksa, sedaj pa je to razmerje urejeno tudi v Direktivi 2015/2436. Sodišče EU je odločilo, da imetnik znamke ne sme onemogočiti 3. osebi uporabe enakega ali podobnega znaka v primerjalnem oglaševanju, če so izpolnjeni pogoji za dopustnost primerjalnega oglaševanja, v Direktivi 2006/114. Če obstaja verjetnost zmede v javnosti zaradi uporabe enakega ali podobnega znaka v primerjalnem oglaševanju, potem pogoji iz 4. člena Direktive 2006/114 niso izpolnjeni.
Keywords:Kršitev znamke, primerjalno oglaševanje, Direktiva 2006/114/ES, Direktiva 2008/95/ES, potrošnik.
Year of publishing:2016
Publisher:[N. Gorenjak]
Source:Maribor
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-57633 New window
UDC:347.78(043.3)
COBISS.SI-ID:5084715 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:4JSXGUD3
Publication date in DKUM:23.05.2016
Views:1783
Downloads:354
Metadata:XML RDF-CHPDL DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:PF
:
  
Average score:(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:AddThis
AddThis uses cookies that require your consent. Edit consent...

Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING AND TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT
Abstract:Topic of master's thesis is about relationship between trademarks and comparative advertising. Using comparative advertising in practice can lead to unfair competition or trademark infringement. In december 2015, Directive (EU) 2015/2436 about trademarks was published. Directive (EU) 2015/2436 repeals Directive 2008/95/EC with effect from January 2019. The content of master's thesis is focused on trademark infringement as a result of foreign trademark use in comparative advertising. Advertising is very important part of European law, because it affects internal market, whose smooth function is one of the most crucial goals of European Union. Advertising can influence people's view and perception, which is why it is important to be regulated. Comparative advertising is any type of advertising, which explicitly or implicitly identifies a competitor or goods and services offered by that party. Comparative advertising is permitted under eight conditions, which are regulated in Directive 2006/114/EC. Due to inter-relationship between comparative advertising and trademark law, Directive 2008/95/EC is also relevant, because it regulates provisions for trademark infringement. In practice, there has been confusion about the relationship between the two Directives, but there was no defined theoretical answer. Solution was made by jurisprudence in two important cases, O2 vs. H3G case and L'Oreal vs. Bellure case. It was said that it is legitimate to use a competitor's trademarks in comparative advertising if one fulfill criteria laid down by the Directive 2006/114/EC. If there is likelihood of confusion because of usage similar or identical sign, conditions could not be met. In order to talk about trademark infringement or allowable comparative advertising, conditions must be met. In practice those conditions were part of different interpretations. Case-law gave amandments to unclear provisions. It is important for a proprietor to know when their legal rights based on trademarks are infringed and also it is important for them to take actions.
Keywords:Trademark infringement, comparative advertising, Directive 2006/114/EC, Directive 2008/95/EC, consumer.


Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica