Hide
Show all
Email this article On the Distinctiveness of QR Code Symbols for the Purposes of Trademark Law
Abstract
The contactless new normal dictated by the global pandemic has re-introduced the nearly three-decade-old QR codes as a new standard of conveyance of information. Not only are they now ubiquitous to the general public but also inseparable to social, commercial and bureaucratic life. Recent history has been witnessing plenty of technical and artistic effort to make these normally abstract and unattractive clusters of dark and light quadratic shapes more eye-catching. In commercial terms, this is particularly motivated by the aim of rendering the code symbols a point of attraction as such, thus securing a more engaging customer interaction. Customized QR codes, having often been associated with brand images and commercial identities, are observed to come closer to the proximity of trademark law. However, the ubiquity and the technically necessary format standards of QR symbols tend to root against the primary premise of the trademarks: distinctiveness. This article seeks to answer whether the signs consisting of or incorporating QR symbols could fulfill the distinctiveness requirement within the framework of the EU law. Given the lack of jurisprudential apprehension of the question at hand, the article, first, sets about reasoning a distinctiveness test on the face of the EU trademark law and that of the relatable jurisprudential interpretations. Secondly, it goes on to administer this test on the signs that consist of or incorporate QR symbols. In the latter respect, limited jurisprudential hints from the Member States and the EUIPO practices shall be put in perspective and compounded with the imperatives of substantive law. The article, consequently substantiates that there is no one-fits-all formula to the question at hand and that QR symbols shall not be excluded as trademarks merely because they are essentially standardized.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
LITERATURE
Athreye S., Piscitello L., Shadlen K.C., Twenty-Five Years since TRIPS: Patent Policy and International Business, “Journal of International Business Policy” 2020, vol. 3, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s42214-020-00079-1.
Bainbridge D.I., Intellectual Property, Essex 2012.
Bamoriya H., QR Code Based Marketing in India and Japan, “European Journal of Applied Economics” 2014, vol. 11(2), DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/sjas11-5504.
Berisso K., Designer QR Codes: Ensuring the “Beep” (White Paper), “IDC 100 Archives, Special Collections and University Archives, Stony Brook University Libraries” 2013.
Braga C.A.P., Trade-Related Intellectual Property Issues: The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries, Chicago 1996.
Calboli I., Trademark Exhaustion in the European Union: Community-Wide or International – The Saga Continues, “Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review” 2002, vol. 6(1).
Crompton H., LaFrance J., Hooft M. van’t, QR Codes 101, “ISTE Learning and Leading with Technology” 2012, vol. 39(8).
Denso ADC, QR Code® Essentials, “Denso ADC” 2011.
Dreyfuss R.C., Pila J. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law, Oxford 2018.
Fujita K., Kuribayashi M., Morii M., Expansion of Image Displayable Area in Design QR Code and Its Applications, “Forum Informatic Technology Papers” 2011, vol. 10(4).
Garateguy G.J., Arce G.R., Lau D.L., Villarreal O.P., QR Images: Optimized Image Embedding in QR Codes, “IEEE Transactions on Image Processing” 2014, vol. 23(7), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2014.2321501.
Gopale V.B., QR Code and Useful Applications in Libraries, “International Journal of Library and Information Studies” 2019, vol. 9(4).
ISO/IEC 18004, Information Technology – Automatic Identification and Data Capture Techniques: QR Code Bar Code Symbology Specification, Geneva 2015.
Karrach L., Pivarčiová E., Božek P., Identification of QR Code Perspective Distortion Based on Edge Directions and Edge Projections Analysis, “Journal of Imaging” 2020, vol. 6(7), DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging6070067.
Kshetri N., Blockchain and Sustainable Supply Chain Management in Developing Countries, “International Journal of Information Management” 2021, vol. 60, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102376.
Kur A., The EU Trademark Reform Package – (Too) Bold a Step Ahead or Back to Status Quo, “Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review” 2015, vol. 19.
Ladas S.P., Patents, Trademarks, and Related Rights: National and International Protection, Cambridge 1976.
Lin S., Hu M., Lee C., Lee T., Efficient QR Code Beautification with High Quality Visual Content, “IEEE Transactions on Multimedia” 2015, vol. 17(9), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2015.2437711.
Maskus K.E., Intellectual Property Rights in the World Trade Organization: Progress and Prospects. Launching New Global Trade Talks: An Action Agenda, Washington 1998.
Okazaki S., Li H., Hirose M., Benchmarking the Use of QR Code in Mobile Promotion: Three Studies in Japan, “Journal of Advertising Research” 2012, vol. 52(1), DOI: https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-52-1-102-117.
Popov Z., Appraising the Distinctiveness of Different Categories of Trade Marks in EC Law, Lund 2009.
Reed I.S., Solomon G., Polynomial Codes Over Certain Finite Fields, “Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics” 1960, vol. 8(2), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1137/0108018.
Ricketson S., The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property: A Commentary, Oxford 2015.
Seville C., EU Intellectual Property Law and Policy, Cheltenham 2016.
Soon T.J., QR Code, “Synthesis Journal” 2008.
Sreenivasulu N.S., Law Relating to Intellectual Property, Kolkata 2013.
Suluk C., Karasu R., Nal T., Fikri Mülkiyet Hukuku, Ankara 2021.
Teuta C., Patel P.S., Sakaguchi T., QR Code: A New Opportunity for Effective Mobile Marketing, “Journal of Mobile Technologies, Knowledge and Society” 2013, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5171/2013. 748267.
Tiwari S., An Introduction to QR Code Technology, “2016 International Conference on Information Technology (ICIT)” 2016, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIT.2016.021.
Zhongpai G., Zhai G., Hu C., The Invisible QR Code, “Proceedings of the 23rd ACM International Conference on Multimedia” 2015.
ONLINE SOURCES
Etherington D., iOS 11 Is a Second Chance for QR Codes and NFC to Hit It Big, 13.9.2017, https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/13/ios-11-is-a-second-chance-for-qr-codes-and-nfc-to-hit-it-big (access: 18.8.2022).
Gostin I., How the Pandemic Saved the QR Code from Extinction, 25.3.2021, https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescommunicationscouncil/2021/03/25/how-the-pandemic-saved-the-qr-code-from-extinction/?sh=bd5cb1b69056 (access: 18.8.2022).
LEGAL ACTS
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, 15 April 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C (1994).
Council Regulation (EC) No. 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ L 11/1, 14.1.1994).
Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (OJ L 336/1, 23.12.2015).
First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (OJ L 40/1, 11.2.1989).
Memorandum on the creation of an EEC trade mark adopted by the Commission on 6 July 1976, “Bulletin of the European Communities”, Supplement 8/76.
Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (March 1883).
Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark (OJ L 154/1, 16.6.2017).
CASE LAW
Decision of the EUIPO Second Board of Appeal of 16 March 2018, R 2358/2017-2, Max Maier.
Judgment of the Bundespatentgericht of 14 October 2015, 28 W (pat) 535/13.
Judgment of the CJEU of 23 May 1978, C-102/77, Hoffmann-La Roche & Co. AG v Centrafarm Vertriebsgesellschaft Pharmazeutischer Erzeugnisse mbH, ECLI:EU:C:1978:108.
Judgment of the CJEU of 11 November 1997, C-251/95, SABEL v Puma, Rudolf Dassler Sport, ECLI:EU:C:1997:528.
Judgment of the CJEU of 20 September 2001, C-383/99 P, Procter & Gamble Company v European Union Intellectual Property Office, ECLI:EU:C:2001:461.
Judgment of the CJEU of 18 June 2002, C-299/99, Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd., ECLI:EU:C:2002:377.
Judgment of the CJEU of 8 April 2003, joined cases C-53/01 to 55/01, Linde AG, Winward Industries Inc. and Rado Uhren AG, ECLI:EU:C:2003:206.
Judgment of the CJEU of 6 May 2003, C-104/01, Libertel Groep BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau, ECLI:EU:C:2003:244.
Judgment of the CJEU of 12 February 2004, C-218/01, Henkel KGaA, ECLI:EU:C:2004:88.
Judgment of the CJEU of 12 February 2004, C-363/99, Koninklijke KPN Nederland NV v Benelux-Merkenbureau, ECLI:EU:C:2004:86.
Judgment of the CJEU of 29 April 2004, joined cases C-456/01 P and C-457/01 P, Henkel KGaA v European Union Intellectual Property Office, ECLI:EU:C:2004:258.
Judgment of the CJEU of 16 September 2004, C-329/02 P, SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office, ECLI:EU:C:2004:532.
Judgment of the CJEU of 30 June 2005, C-286/04 P, Eurocermex v OHIM, ECLI:EU:C:2005:422.
Judgment of the CJEU of 15 September 2005, C-37/03 P, BioID AG, en liquidation v European Union Intellectual Property Office, ECLI:EU:C:2005:547.
Judgment of the CJEU of 9 March 2006, C-421/04, Matratzen Concord AG v Hukla Germany SA, ECLI:EU:C:2006:164.
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 19 September 2001, T-337/99, Henkel KGaA v European Union Intellectual Property Office, ECLI:EU:T:2001:221.
Judgment of the United States Supreme Court of 6 March 1916, Hanover Star Milling v. Metcalf, 240 US 403, 415 (1916).
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/sil.2022.31.4.29-57
Date of publication: 2022-12-28 17:32:56
Date of submission: 2022-09-26 10:23:43
Statistics
Indicators
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2022 Osman Bugra Beydogan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.