Intel tried unsuccessfully to stop the use of the mark Intelmark, owned by CPM, through the European Court of Justice on the ground that it would dilute its famous mark.
According to the Court the fact that an earlier mark has a “huge reputation”; that its goods or services are dissimilar to those of the later mark; that the earlier mark is unique; and that for the average consumer “the later mark calls the earlier mark to mind” is “not sufficient” to establish that the use of the later mark “takes or would take advantage of, or is or would be detrimental to, the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier mark”.
It was explained that a proof detriment requires evidence of a change, or likelihood for such a change in the future, in the economic behaviour of the average consumer of the goods or services bearing the earlier mark. This is likely to require famous brand owners to provide survey or to seek for other evidence a change in consumers “economic behaviour“.
author: Nadezda Dragomirova
