EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-338/11: Action brought on 30 June 2011 — Getty Images v OHIM (PHOTOS.COM)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011TN0338

62011TN0338

June 30, 2011
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

27.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/39

(Case T-338/11)

2011/C 252/87

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Getty Images (US), Inc. (Seattle, United States) (represented by: P.G. Olson, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Form of order sought

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 April 2011 in case R 1831/2010-2; and

Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘PHOTOS.COM’ for goods and services in classes 9, 42 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 8549991

Decision of the Examiner: Partially refused the application for a Community trade mark

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) in conjunction with Article 7(3) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal: (i) wrongly found that the mark applied for describes the goods/services for which registration was sought; (ii) erred by disregarding the fact that the applicant’s domain name registration corresponds to the mark applied for and has an effect on the assessment of the mark’s distinctive character; and (iii) wrongly assessed that the documentation was insufficient to document that the mark had acquired distinctiveness and based its decision on misunderstanding and misconception of the evidence presented. Infringement of the principles of equal treatment and legitimate expectation, as the Board of Appeal wrongly rejected the importance of the fact that OHIM has accepted the applicant’s trademark ‘PHOTOS.COM’ for similar goods and services in a prior application.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia