In the eagerly-awaited MONOPOLY judgment, the General Court (GC) confirmed that the MONOPOLY mark was filed in bad faith - to the extent it covered identical goods and services - because the challenged EUTM was a re-filing of three earlier identical EUTMs. It also confirmed that administrative efficiency resulting from reliance on marks not subject to use is not a good reason for repeated trade mark filings, not even for goods for which the mark is in use.
Please log-in or register to access Engage and set your preferences
Create a free account for access to this publication and our vast catalogue of legal updates
Log-in to continue reading
Scan this QR Code to share this content
