Facebook Twitter Instagram Linkedin
Contact

Dreyfus

Entry into Force on May 1, 2025 of the “Designs Package”: Modernizing the EU Framework

Written by Dreyfus19/11/2024

The recent publication of Regulation (EU) 2024/2822 and Directive (EU) 2024/2823 marks a key milestone in the modernization of the European legal framework for designs. Taking effect on May 1, 2025, these reforms aim to harmonize, simplify, and adapt the system to the digital age.

Harmonization and modernization 

The term “Community design” has been updated to “European Union design” (EUD). This symbolic change modernizes the terminology while aligning it with that of European trademarks. To enhance identification, a visual symbol Ⓓ has been introduced, providing greater coherence within the system.

The reform expands definitions to incorporate technological advances. Animations, graphical interfaces, and digital twins are now included in the scope of protection, reflecting their essential role in modern industries. The concept of “product” has also been extended to non-physical forms, covering items used in video games or virtual environments such as the metaverse.

Filing procedures are now more flexible and better suited to creators’ needs. Applications can group up to 50 designs without classification constraints, and various digital formats are now accepted for design representations. Additionally, creators can defer publication for up to 30 months, offering strategic discretion to protect their designs while planning their market launch.

To promote accessibility, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and independent designers, some fees have been reduced or eliminated. Filing fees, for example, have been lowered, and the costs associated with the transfer of rights have been completely removed. However, a notable increase in renewal fees is expected. Previously, renewal fees for a 25-year period ranged from €90 to €180. Under the new framework, fees will start at €150 and rise to €700 by the fourth renewal cycle. This adjustment may disproportionately affect industries with longer product life cycles, such as automotive and industrial design, compared to industries like fashion, which are less impacted by the fee increase.

Enhanced protection of rights 

The EU reform clarifies key aspects of design visibility. From now on, visibility is no longer a general requirement for protection, except for components of complex products. This revision eliminates past ambiguities and extends protection to a wider range of contemporary and diverse designs.

A major innovation is the introduction of the repair clause. This provision removes legal protection for spare parts necessary to restore the appearance of a complex product, limiting exclusive rights in this domain. The measure strikes a balance between design protection and competition in the spare parts market. However, it requires manufacturers to inform consumers about the origin of the products used for repairs, enhancing transparency and enabling informed choices.

In the realm of 3D printing, the reform introduces an exclusive right allowing rights holders to prohibit the creation, dissemination, and use of digital files capable of reproducing a protected design via 3D printing. Although this technology remains relatively uncommon in households, the provisions anticipate its potential growth, safeguarding creators’ rights in this emerging field.

Lastly, the reform extends rights holders’ protections to goods in transit within the European Union, even if their final destination is outside EU territory. This change strengthens the enforcement of intellectual property rights in a globalized context, addressing the challenges posed by counterfeit goods in international trade.

Alternative dispute resolution and legal certainty 

The reform encourages EU Member States to establish administrative mechanisms for contesting the validity of national designs. Inspired by the EUIPO model for the European trademark (oppositions and cancelation actions), this approach offers a less expensive and faster alternative to traditional judicial procedures.

Additionally, the requirement for first disclosure within the EU has been abolished. Now, the initial disclosure of a design outside the EU can confer protection as an unregistered design. This change eliminates ambiguities from previous regulations, an important aspect in the post-Brexit context, where many designers chose the UK for their first presentations. This clarification further harmonizes the legal framework and reduces uncertainties for creators operating across multiple markets.

Key challenges to monitor 

While the reform has integrated significant advances for the digital age, uncertainties remain regarding the protection of AI-generated designs. This rapidly growing area raises fundamental questions about the adequacy of current legal frameworks, making it essential to ensure effective protection tailored to these new forms of creation.

Additionally, the growing divergences between EU and UK regimes, exacerbated by Brexit, require close attention. Creators and businesses must exercise caution to harmonize their design protection strategies in these two now-distinct territories, minimizing legal and commercial risks associated with this fragmentation.

Timeline and future prospects 

The new provisions will take effect in May 2025 for the regulation, while Member States have until December 2027 to transpose the directive into their national laws. This phased approach aims to ensure a harmonized application of the new rules across the European Union, offering creators an adjustment period.

The EU design reform represents a significant step forward in modernizing the legal framework and addressing 21st-century challenges. By clarifying key concepts, simplifying processes, and anticipating technological developments, the European Union offers a robust and inclusive system. For businesses and creators operating in Europe, adapting swiftly to these changes is essential to maximize the protection and competitiveness of their designs.

For assistance with managing and protecting your designs, our intellectual property experts are at your service. Dreyfus Law Firm with an international network of lawyers specializing in Intellectual Property.

 

Join us on social media!

Instagram

LinkedIn

 

Read More

Case Study on Trademark Fraud Allegations in France: Hot Couture’s Pierre Cadault from Netflix Hit Series “Emily in Paris”

Written by Dreyfus18/11/2024

Breaking Down INPI’s Landmark Decision: A Tale of Two Industries

 The French National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) recently addressed an intriguing trademark dispute that caught the entertainment industry’s attention. The case, involving a character name from the popular Netflix series “Emily in Paris,” has illuminated crucial aspects of bad faith trademark registration claims in the entertainment sector. The dispute centered on a trademark registration filed for cosmetics under Class 3, strategically positioned two months after the series premiere. The contested trademark is related to a fictional character portrayed as an extravagant couturier in the series, creating an unexpected intersection between beauty, fashion, and trademark law.

 

The INPI’s investigation delved deep into the chronology of events. Their analysis revealed “insufficient evidence” to establish the trademark holder’s awareness of prior use at the filing date. Despite the character “Pierre Cadault” prominently featured in the series as a renowned fashion designer, the evidence failed to demonstrate that the name “Cadault” alone had achieved meaningful recognition in France during the crucial initial months following the show’s release.

 

The art of proving bad faith: Beyond surface-level analysis

 A pivotal element in the INPI’s decision rested on the distinction between industries. While acknowledging the subtle connection between high fashion and cosmetics, the INPI determined that cosmetics operate in a separate commercial sphere from haute couture. This industry differentiation substantially weakened any presumed connection between the character’s name and the registered trademark category.

 

The INPI emphasized a fundamental principle: “mere awareness” of prior use does not constitute fraudulent intent. The burden of proving bad faith registration demands concrete evidence that the filing was specifically calculated to prevent a third party from utilizing a necessary business identifier. The timing of the registration, occurring two and a half months post-series launch, combined with the absence of communication between parties, significantly influenced the final determination.

 

The INPI’s reasoning revealed a subtle understanding of practical trademark enforcement. The notable absence of any legal action by the trademark holder to prevent the character’s name use in the series substantially undermined claims of malicious intent. This passive approach contrasted sharply with typical bad-faith scenarios, where trademark holders actively pursue cease-and-desist measures or legal proceedings.

 

A framework precision for evaluating bad faith

 The decision carried significant implications for the intersection of entertainment properties and trademark rights. The INPI acknowledged that while obtaining an injunction to prevent character name use would be legally challenging, potential conflicts could arise if Viacom pursued character-based cosmetic products. This nuanced observation highlights the complex relationship between entertainment content and commercial trademark rights.

 

This decision clarifies the framework for assessing bad faith in entertainment-related trademark registrations. The ruling emphasizes the critical importance of substantial evidence, industry context, and practical commercial implications. Future disputes will likely reference this decision’s “balanced approach” to evaluating trademark validity in the entertainment sector.

 

Conclusion

 The INPI’s thorough analysis offers valuable guidance for navigating the complex landscape of entertainment property rights and trademark protection. The decision underscores the necessity of considering both immediate and potential future commercial applications when evaluating trademark registration intent. This forward-looking perspective ensures that trademark protection serves its intended purpose without unduly restricting creative expression in the entertainment industry.

 

The ruling’s subtle approach to analyzing bad faith claims provides a robust framework that balances the legitimate interests of trademark applicants with those of entertainment property rights holders. As the entertainment industry continues to evolve, this decision will serve as a crucial reference point for resolving similar disputes, ensuring fair and practical outcomes in the dynamic intersection of entertainment and trademark law.

 

 At Dreyfus Law Firm, we recognize that the entertainment and media landscape present unique challenges for trademark protection, as evidenced by the recent “Emily in Paris” case. Our expertise lies in navigating these complex intersections between creative content and trademark rights. We guide entrepreneurs and companies through the intricate process of establishing and defending their trademark rights, particularly when industries overlap, as we saw with the fashion and cosmetics sectors in this case. “Bad faith claims” require sophisticated analysis and compelling evidence, but they are insufficient to demonstrate prior use or knowledge. Dreyfus Law Firm excels at building comprehensive strategies that consider both immediate concerns and future commercial implications. Our team prides itself on helping clients understand the practical aspects of trademark enforcement while ensuring their intellectual property assets are properly protected across multiple industries and jurisdictions.

Dreyfus Law Firm partners with an international network of lawyers specializing in intellectual property law.

Join us on social media!

Instagram

Linkedin

Read More

Securing Creations: The Blueprint to French Intellectual Property Dispute Resolution

Written by Dreyfus05/11/2024

French intellectual property (IP) law, deeply rooted in civil law tradition, is designed to ensure robust protection and enforcement of IP rights. The French legal framework for intellectual property disputes encompasses civil and criminal remedies, specialized courts, and a highly structured procedural system. This article delves into the intricacies of IP dispute resolution in France, focusing on trademark enforcement, litigation procedures, available remedies, and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms while highlighting the essential balance between civil and criminal liabilities in IP infringement cases.

Trademark Enforcement in French Law

Trademark protection in France is governed by the Intellectual Property Code, which outlines the legal avenues available to trademark owners in cases of infringement. The law offers a dual approach whereby acts of infringement can be classified as both criminal and civil offenses. In most cases, trademark disputes are handled by civil courts. However, certain violations may lead to criminal prosecution.

 

For criminal liability, the stakes are high. Trademark infringement can result in substantial penalties, with fines reaching up to 400,000 euros and imprisonment for up to four years for individuals. Legal entities may face fines of up to 2 million euros. While these penalties underline the seriousness with which France views IP violations, the majority of trademark disputes remain within the civil court system, with ten designated courts spread across France, including key jurisdictions like Paris, Marseille, and Lyon.

 

Procedural Pathways in IP Disputes

A trademark infringement lawsuit in France typically begins with a writ of summons, a procedural document laying out the nature of the dispute, legal arguments, and remedies sought. The summons must also contain evidence of the claimant’s attempt to resolve the issue amicably before resorting to litigation. Once filed, both parties are required to be represented by legal counsel throughout the proceedings.

 

The civil litigation process is notably distinct in France due to the absence of a discovery phase. Instead, a claimant can request a search and seizure procedure commonly referred to as “saisie-contrefaçon.” This powerful mechanism enables the claimant, with the assistance of a bailiff, to collect evidence of infringement, including seizing goods and related documents. To initiate this procedure, the claimant must first obtain court authorization, which is granted upon showing a reasonable suspicion of IP infringement. Once the “saisie-contrefaçon” is completed, the claimant has a strict timeline, typically 20 business days or 31 calendar days, to file the main proceedings, failing which the evidence seized may become inadmissible.

 

French courts also adhere to a stringent timeline for rendering decisions in first-instance proceedings, with judgments typically issued within 24 months. This relatively predictable timeframe particularly appeals to right holders seeking timely enforcement of their rights.

 

Burden of Proof and Remedies

As in most civil legal systems, the burden of proof in French IP law lies with the claimant. This responsibility extends to establishing both the occurrence of the infringing act and the likelihood of continued or imminent infringement. In some cases, particularly when seeking provisional relief, such as a preliminary injunction, the claimant must demonstrate that the trademark violation appears likely or is about to occur.

 

French courts offer both provisional and permanent remedies. Provisional remedies can be awarded during injunctive proceedings and may include an order prohibiting further infringement, the seizure of suspect goods, or a requirement for the infringer to provide financial guarantees. Permanent remedies are granted once the court rules on the merits of the case, which may involve the destruction or recall of infringing goods, as well as orders to cease all infringing activities. Additionally, monetary remedies are calculated based on the economic harm caused to the trademark owner, the profits made by the infringer, and any moral damages. However, French law does not provide for punitive damages, and courts retain discretion when determining the final award.

 

Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Growing Trend

While litigation remains the primary method for resolving IP disputes in France, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques, such as mediation and conciliation, are slowly gaining traction. The French government and courts are actively encouraging the use of ADR as a cost-effective, confidential, and flexible means of resolving IP conflicts. One of the key advantages of ADR lies in its ability to preserve business relationships while offering swift resolution, as parties can enter into ADR before or after litigation has commenced.

 

That said, ADR, in the context of intellectual property disputes, carries certain limitations. For instance, rights holders seeking immediate relief, such as a preliminary injunction or seizure order, must rely on the courts, as ADR mechanisms do not provide such enforceable interim measures. Despite these limitations, the growth of ADR signals a shift toward more collaborative methods of resolving trademark and other IP disputes in France.

 

Conclusion

French intellectual property dispute resolution offers a comprehensive, well-structured system that balances civil and criminal liabilities, provides robust enforcement mechanisms, and promotes alternative means of conflict resolution. Trademark owners benefit from clearly defined procedural rules, access to specialized courts, and a range of both provisional and permanent remedies. As the role of ADR continues to grow, the flexibility of the French system ensures that right holders can tailor their enforcement strategies to the unique demands of each case. Through a combination of litigation, administrative enforcement, and ADR, France remains a key jurisdiction for the protection of intellectual property rights.

 

With our team’s mastery of French Intellectual Property Law Dispute Resolution, trademark enforcement, civil and criminal litigation, procedural efficiency, and the nuanced application of search and seizure procedures “saisie-contrefaçon”, Dreyfus Law Firm provides clients with a decisive edge in safeguarding their intellectual property rights. The firm’s intimate understanding of the French legal landscape and its strategic use of provisional and permanent remedies ensure swift and effective resolution of IP disputes. Companies seeking to protect their valuable assets can trust Dreyfus Law Firm to deliver robust defense strategies, minimize litigation costs, and, where appropriate, navigate alternative dispute resolution methods to achieve favorable outcomes. Their expertise in this complex area of law makes them the optimal choice for businesses aiming to secure their intellectual property in the competitive French market.

Dreyfus Law Firm partners with an international network of lawyers specializing in intellectual property.

Join us on social media!

 

Instagram

LinkedIn

Read More

Blockchain Technology: A Revolution in Legal Evidence?

Written by Dreyfus30/10/2024

In the field of intellectual property law, the matter of evidence is crucial. Traditionally, electronic timestamping offered a solution. However, these methods remain limited by national frameworks. Conversely, blockchain is a global, reliable, accessible alternative that could become a prominent international standard.

 

How Blockchain Evidence Works

Blockchain is a decentralized technology characterized by transparency and security. Unlike centralized systems, it operates without a single control authority. Each transaction is recorded in a shared ledger, creating a chain of tamper-proof information. Public blockchains are accessible to all, similar to an indestructible public ledger, while private blockchains restrict access. This structure ensures data remains immutable and unalterable.

The system’s security is maintained by miners, who validate transactions by solving complex calculations in exchange for rewards, ensuring the integrity of the information.

 

How to Use Blockchain for Proof

  1. Create a Hash: The document is converted into a unique string of numbers and letters (a hash).
  2. Record on the Blockchain: The hash is registered in the blockchain through a minor financial transaction, making it permanent.
  3. Verification: To prove authenticity, simply compare the current document’s hash with the one on the blockchain. A match confirms its authenticity.

 

Traditional Solutions vs. Blockchain

Traditional evidence solutions, although effective, are often limited to national jurisdictions, posing obstacles internationally. Procedures like notary records or the Soleau envelope do not offer universal protection. Blockchain, however, being open source, offers universal timestamping based on mathematical rules, lowering entry barriers and providing an immutable and traceable proof system.

 

Various Use Cases

  • Creation Protection:
    • Ongoing Protection: Blockchain timestamps each version of a creation (e.g., fashion, jewelry), providing continuous coverage, even for unfinished works.
    • Pre-Patent Protection: During R&D phases, blockchain proves the existence of unpatented inventions, avoiding the need for immediate patent filing.
    • Contributor Traceability: In collaborative projects, blockchain identifies each contribution, reducing authorship disputes.
  • Electronic Signatures: Introduced in France in 2000 and standardized in the EU by the eIDAS Regulation, electronic signatures now include three types: simple, advanced, and qualified. Blockchain is increasingly used in this area to ensure integrity and authenticity, meeting the criteria for simple and advanced signatures. With the implementation of eIDAS 2 in 2024, blockchain could be integrated into qualified electronic signature systems.

 

Current Limitations and Future Prospects

In France, the legal recognition of blockchain evidence is mainly limited to the financial sector. For example, Ordinance No. 2016-520 authorized blockchains to record and transfer unlisted financial assets, like minibonds. Ordinance No. 2017-1674 and Decree No. 2018-1226 further extended their use of shared electronic financial security records. The PACTE Law of 2019 strengthened this by authorizing the recording and circulation of financial assets on the blockchain, including stocks and bonds.

At the European level, Regulation 910/2014/EU, effective since July 1, 2016, validates electronic signatures and timestamps, implicitly including blockchain, as admissible evidence in court, granting them similar legal value to handwritten signatures.

French law relies on a mixed system of evidence: the principle of freedom of evidence with exceptions for legal proof, mainly applied to legal acts. Perfect proof includes written documents (authentic or private), judicial admissions, decisive oaths, and reliable copies. Imperfect proofs, such as blockchain, are subject to the judge’s discretion and do not have predefined probative value by law.

Therefore, it is advisable to use a bailiff’s report. While verifying a digital fingerprint in the blockchain is technically simple and achievable via open-source tools, the judge cannot perform this manipulation. A bailiff, acting as a judicial officer, provides this report, offering technical proof to the judge and facilitating the use of blockchain evidence in legal proceedings.

 

Conclusion

Although blockchain is still considered imperfect proof under French law, its recognition is growing. It could soon become a global standard, surpassing traditional methods. Blockchain is redefining the framework of evidence in intellectual property, offering a solution adapted to the challenges of an international market.

Dreyfus Law Firm offers expert guidance at every stage of creation protection. Our mastery of legal subtleties and global market experience ensures optimal, tailored protection for your specific needs.

 

Dreyfus Law Firm works in close collaboration with a global network of specialized intellectual property lawyers.

Join us on social media!

Instagram

LinkedIn

Read More

Co-branding: Strategy, Opportunities, and Challenges

Written by Dreyfus28/10/2024

By Dreyfuslawfirm

 

Co-branding has emerged as an indispensable strategy for companies aiming to extend their influence, enhance brand equity, and foster product innovation. However, this form of multi-brand collaboration necessitates meticulous planning and rigorous scrutiny due to its inherent risks. This article delves into the essential elements of co-branding, both from marketing and legal perspectives, while also identifying the opportunities and challenges associated with these strategic alliances.

 

Strategic Alignment and Value Convergence

The success of co-branding hinges on the precise strategic alignment between partner brands. These entities must share fundamental values and pursue compatible strategic goals, a condition necessary to establish a seamless collaboration and leverage potential synergies. Furthermore, each brand must target similar or complementary audiences to ensure a positive market impact and maximize the partnership’s overall outcome.

Mutual Benefits and Complementary Competencies

The core of successful co-branding lies in the creation of shared value. Co-branding thrives when each partner leverages its unique strengths: one brand may possess cutting-edge technological expertise, while another has established market recognition. By merging these distinct competencies, brands can offer high-value products or services unattainable independently, generating synergistic outcomes that exceed the sum of individual contributions.

Reputation and Risk Management

The reputation of partners is a critical factor in co-branding initiatives. Associating with a brand that has a questionable or undeveloped reputation can impair the overall image of the initiating company. Thus, thorough due diligence is paramount to evaluate the prospective partner’s stability and ensure their alignment with the project’s dynamics. Risks, including those related to consumer perception, must be identified and thoroughly assessed.

Legal Considerations: Intellectual Property and Contractual Agreements

Legal considerations are fundamental in ensuring the stability and viability of a co-branding partnership. Intellectual property (IP) rights concerning trademarks, logos, and co-created content must be clearly defined from the outset. Comprehensive contractual agreements are necessary to delineate each party’s roles and responsibilities, including revenue-sharing clauses and financial obligations. These agreements should incorporate predetermined dispute resolution mechanisms aimed at preventing and managing potential conflicts throughout the collaboration.

 

Quality Control and Consumer Perception

Quality control is another major aspect of co-branding. The perceived quality of co-branded products or services must be maintained to avoid damaging the brand image, which could negatively impact both entities. Quality standards must be established early and adhered to strictly to ensure consistency and protect the reputation of each partner.

 

Recent Statistics: Growth and Evolution of Co-branding

Recent data underscores the growing prevalence of co-branding: approximately 65% of marketing executives view these partnerships as essential for brand growth. Moreover, 71% of consumers report being more inclined to purchase a product co-branded with a trusted brand. These statistics highlight the importance of selecting strategic partners to maximize growth and reinforce consumer trust.

 

Expanding Industries and Digital Integration

Several sectors are distinguished by their effective use of co-branding:

– Technology: Partnerships between technology firms and health applications.

– Food and Beverages: Creation of unique products through collaborations between snack and confectionery brands.

– Fashion: Limited-edition collections that are often highly publicized and impactful.

– Automotive: Integration of advanced technologies through collaborations with high-tech companies.

 

These industries leverage co-branding to innovate, reach new market segments, and create unique value propositions, often utilizing digital strategies such as video marketing on social media platforms.

Challenges and Risks of Co-branding

Despite its numerous benefits, co-branding also presents challenges. Among the most significant are brand dilution, differences in corporate culture, and quality control issues. A major difficulty is ensuring equitable benefit distribution between partners to avoid tensions or resentment. Proactive management, through clear contracts and regular communication, is crucial to prevent these issues and guarantee the partnership’s success.

Conclusion: Optimizing Co-branded Collaborations

Co-branding offers a unique opportunity to expand each brand’s reach and enhance overall credibility, provided that the inherent challenges are fully understood. Rigorous strategic planning, structured risk management, and a clear delineation of roles and responsibilities are essential for maximizing success. With a methodical approach and anticipation of obstacles, companies can effectively leverage the unique advantages of co-branding while mitigating potential pitfalls.

Dreyfus Law Firm partners with an international network of lawyers specializing in intellectual property.

Follow us on social media!

Instagram

LinkedIn

 

Read More

France’s IP Legislation: Mastering Trademarks in a Global Playground

Written by Dreyfus21/10/2024

The French Intellectual Property Legal Framework: A Comprehensive Overview

The foundation of intellectual property (IP) law in France is a testament to its historical influence on legal traditions and reflects its progressive adaptation to new technological developments and globalization. The French IP system, particularly in the realm of trademarks, is robust, detailed, and harmonized with international conventions. It is structured to protect the creativity and innovations of individuals and companies alike.

 

The Core of French Trademark Law

 France’s trademark law is primarily governed by Law No. 91-7 of January 4, 1991, which was amended by Ordinance No. 2019-1169 of November 13, 2019. These laws are codified in the French Intellectual Property Code (FIPC), which forms the backbone of domestic regulations. The amendments have largely been driven by the need to align French law with broader European Union directives and international standards.

 

Trademarks in France serve as legal instruments that safeguard distinct business identifiers, names, logos, designs, and even sounds by ensuring exclusive rights to their use. The legal system also extends protection to non-traditional trademarks, including motion marks, holograms, and multimedia representations. The core requirements for trademark protection in France are quite clear: a trademark must be capable of distinguishing goods or services from those of others and be capable of being represented clearly in the official registry. The National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) is the official body responsible for regulating trademarks in France.

 

A Global Player in Intellectual Property

France is not isolated in its legal approach to intellectual property. It actively participates in several key international agreements that shape global IP law. Among these, the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883) and the Madrid Agreement (1892) have been foundational. Additionally, France’s signature on the TRIPS Agreement (1994) aligns it with international trade obligations, while agreements such as the Nice Agreement (1957) ensure a harmonized classification of goods and services worldwide. These treaties facilitate the international registration of trademarks and create a cohesive framework that allows French businesses to compete globally while protecting their intellectual property.

 

International agreements simplify the process of cross-border trademark registrations and provide mechanisms for French entities to enforce their rights in other jurisdictions. For instance, the Madrid Protocol (1997) and the Vienna Agreement (1973) offer frameworks for international classification and protection of figurative marks.

 

Establishing and Enforcing Rights: The Role of Registration

While registration is not mandatory to establish trademark ownership in many jurisdictions, in France, unregistered trademarks are not afforded legal protection. The concept of “common law” trademarks does not exist in French law. However, owners of well-known marks, defined under Article 6-bis of the Paris Convention, can use provisions under French tort law to prevent the misuse of similar signs. In practical terms, registration with the INPI ensures a more straightforward path to enforcement, including access to specialized courts and legal remedies in infringement cases.

 

Once registered, a French trademark is valid for a period of 10 years, and the registration can be renewed indefinitely. The registration also provides a presumption of validity, simplifying legal disputes related to ownership and use. Notably, the non-use of a trademark over a five-year period opens the door for third-party cancellation actions.

 

Challenging a Trademark: Opposition and Cancellation Proceedings

The French trademark system allows third parties to challenge applications and existing registrations. Once a trademark application is filed, it is published in the Trademark Gazette, opening a two-month window for opposition. Oppositions can be based on prior rights, including existing trademarks, copyright, company names, or geographical indications.

 

Cancellation proceedings are equally vital in maintaining the integrity of the trademark register. Such actions may be based on grounds including the lack of distinctiveness, bad faith, or non-use. The process typically involves multiple exchanges of evidence and legal arguments between the parties. Moreover, if a trademark is found to be misleading, deceptive, or descriptive, it can be invalidated.

 Online and Digital Dimensions of Trademark Protection

As the world becomes increasingly digitized, the protection of trademarks in online environments has gained prominence. Under the Electronic Post and Telecommunications Code, French law provides mechanisms to cancel or transfer infringing domain names. Domain names, which hold significant commercial value, can form part of opposition proceedings if they have established sufficient recognition among the public.

 

Infringement in the online space is treated similarly to traditional forms of infringement, with courts recognizing the unique challenges posed by digital platforms. Trademarks can also be enforced under the French unfair competition law, which extends protection against unfair commercial practices, particularly in cases where foreign well-known trademarks are involved.

 

Licensing and Assignment: Managing Trademark Rights

Trademarks, as valuable business assets, can be licensed or assigned, partially or wholly, for specific goods and services. Licensing agreements, when recorded with the INPI, allow for easier enforcement of trademark rights and enable the licensee to pursue infringement claims if authorized. The assignment of trademarks, which can be for tax purposes or business restructuring, must be executed in writing and signed by both parties.

 

Recording such transactions is not mandatory for validity, but it is crucial for enforceability against third parties. The INPI manages the recorded licenses and assignments with processes designed to be efficient and cost-effective.

 

Conclusion: The Future of French Intellectual Property Law

France’s intellectual property legal framework is a dynamic system that balances tradition with modern innovation. Its alignment with international standards and robust domestic regulations ensures that businesses operating within its jurisdiction can effectively protect and enforce their intellectual property. As new technologies emerge, the French legal system will likely continue to adapt, ensuring that its IP laws remain relevant and responsive to the needs of creators and businesses alike.

 

At Dreyfus Law Firm, our team is well-versed in the intricacies of the French IP legal framework, ensuring that our clients confidently navigate the complexities of trademark registration, enforcement, and international agreements. We understand the unique challenges that arise in today’s digital landscape and are committed to providing tailored solutions that protect your creative assets.

 

By partnering with Dreyfus Law Firm, companies can effectively manage their intellectual property portfolios and safeguard their innovations. Our comprehensive approach facilitates smooth registration processes and equips clients with strategies to tackle potential infringements and disputes. With our guidance, businesses can focus on what they do best, innovating, while we handle the legal intricacies of IP management. Choose Dreyfus Law Firm to ensure your intellectual property is in expert hands!

 

Dreyfus Law Firm partners with an international network of lawyers specializing in intellectual property.

Follow us on social media!

Instagram

LinkedIn

Read More

The EU AI Act and Its Implications for Global Business

Written by Dreyfus14/10/2024

Rapid artificial intelligence (AI) technology development has created the need for clear and harmonized regulation to ensure ethical use, safety, and innovation. The European Union’s AI Act (EU AI Act) is poised to become the world’s first comprehensive legal framework regulating AI, impacting not only European businesses but global industries operating within or interacting with the EU market. This article delves into the key aspects of the EU AI Act and its far-reaching implications for global business operations.

 

Overview of the EU AI Act

The Scope of the AI Act. The EU AI Act categorizes AI systems into different risk levels—unacceptable, high, limited, low, and minimal—each requiring varying degrees of regulatory scrutiny. The legislation primarily targets high-risk AI systems that significantly impact people’s safety, rights, and freedoms. These include AI applications in healthcare, transportation, and critical infrastructure sectors.

Compliance Requirements for High-Risk AI Systems. Under the AI Act, businesses must adhere to stringent compliance requirements for high-risk AI systems. These compliance requirements include conducting conformity assessments, ensuring robust risk management systems, and maintaining transparency and accountability throughout the AI lifecycle. Companies must also prepare for regular monitoring and audits, which designated authorities across EU member states will enforce.

 

Implications for Global Businesses

Direct Impact on AI Developers and Providers. Any company developing or providing AI systems based within or outside the EU must comply with the EU AI Act if its products are used within the Union. This extraterritorial reach of the regulation means that global businesses, particularly those in tech-heavy industries, must prioritize legal compliance to avoid penalties, including fines of up to 6% of their global annual turnover.

Increased Costs of Compliance and Innovation. The need for AI system conformity assessments, data governance policies, and risk management frameworks can significantly improve operational costs. For non-EU businesses, navigating the complex compliance landscape may require engaging local legal and technical experts, further driving up costs. However, these compliance measures also encourage responsible AI development and consumer trust, potentially opening new markets for companies able to demonstrate adherence to ethical AI standards.

 

Strategic Considerations for Businesses

Risk Mitigation and Liability. Understanding the liability risks associated with AI implementation under the EU AI Act is critical for global businesses. Companies must proactively establish comprehensive risk management processes to mitigate the legal and financial risks tied to AI systems that are deemed high-risk. Compliance can help reduce liability exposure and enhance operational security.

Competitive Advantages of Early Compliance. While compliance with the EU AI Act may initially seem burdensome, businesses that invest in early compliance efforts stand to gain significant competitive advantages. These include improved consumer trust, better market positioning in Europe, and reduced risk of facing regulatory penalties. Additionally, businesses that adhere to the Act’s principles will likely see enhanced brand reputation globally as ethical AI becomes a growing concern for consumers and regulators worldwide.

 

Broader Global Impact of the EU AI Act

Influence on Other Jurisdictions. As the EU AI Act sets a global precedent, other jurisdictions, including the U.S., China, and the UK, are expected to follow suit with their own AI regulations. This cascading effect may lead to the global harmonization of AI laws, pushing businesses to simultaneously adapt their AI strategies in multiple markets.

The Role of AI in International Trade. AI has become integral to various industries, and its regulation will affect international trade agreements, especially those involving digital products and services. Global companies must prepare for AI-related clauses to appear in trade negotiations, with compliance with the EU AI Act becoming a critical element of future international agreements.

 

Conclusion

The EU AI Act represents a landmark regulatory effort that will have significant implications for global businesses. While the compliance requirements are rigorous, they offer opportunities for companies to lead in the AI space by embracing ethical AI practices. The key for businesses is to view this regulatory shift not as a burden but as a pathway to building trust and ensuring sustainable growth in the ever-evolving world of artificial intelligence.

 

Our expertise in intellectual property enables us to guide companies through the regulatory challenges related to artificial intelligence. The European AI Act imposes strict requirements for compliance, transparency, and risk management, particularly for high-risk AI systems. With our deep understanding of intellectual property and emerging technologies, we help our clients navigate this complex framework, protecting their innovations while ensuring they meet the new standards.

 

Dreyfus Law Firm partners with an international network of lawyers specializing in Intellectual Property.

Join us on social media!

Instagram

Linkedin

Read More

Combating Counterfeiting: Organizing European Customs Surveillance

Written by Dreyfus14/10/2024

Counterfeiting represents a major challenge to modern economies. Each year, between four and twenty million counterfeit goods are intercepted by European customs, highlighting the extent of this phenomenon and the crucial importance of customs interventions in the fight against counterfeiting.

Extent of Counterfeiting and its Impacts

Although the collective imagination often associates counterfeiting with luxury products, statistics reveal a more nuanced reality. Toys rank first in the sad ranking of the most counterfeited products, followed by sports articles, empty packaging and labels, then food and beverages, which present significant risks to consumers. Clothing and accessories only come in fifth place. This diversity of products underscores the need for constant vigilance adapted to each category of goods.

Economically, counterfeiting represents a colossal threat, with a market valued at 410 billion euros, or 2.5% of global trade—far surpassing the drug trafficking market valued at 320 billion euros. Within the European Union, counterfeiting is estimated at 119 billion euros and accounts for 5.8% of imports. Beyond the economic impact, counterfeiting also harms the environment and public health, with products often manufactured under deplorable conditions and waste discharged into nature.

Legislation and Customs Actions

In the face of this challenge, the French Customs Code plays a predominant role. Article 414 provides for specific offenses such as smuggling and the importation or exportation of prohibited goods without declaration. These offenses lead to sanctions independent of those for counterfeiting.

The Code also grants customs extensive control powers, allowing them to conduct inspections on public roads, in businesses, and even, under certain conditions, in private homes.

Customs do not just control; they can also detain suspect goods. This detention can be initiated with or without a prior request for intervention by the rights holder. The verification process and the initiation of legal action are governed by strict deadlines (10 days if there is a request for intervention or 4 days without this document), thus providing a quick and effective response to combat counterfeiting.

Cooperation and Responsibilities

Collaboration between customs and rights holders is essential in determining whether goods are counterfeit. The goal is to decide whether to maintain the goods in retention.

However, in the event of seizure of non-counterfeit goods, the rules of liability are clear: customs may be held responsible for their employees’ errors, and rights holders may also be involved, according to applicable national law. This shared responsibility ensures a certain caution in seizure operations.

On a global scale, the fight against counterfeiting is supported by organizations such as the World Customs Organization and Interpol. At the European level, EUIPO, Europol, and OLAF (European Anti-Fraud Office) play a key role. Nationally, customs wield considerable power, often being the first to intercept goods upon their entry into the territory. Again, the cooperation is important.

Perspectives and Evolution

Counterfeiting is inseparable from other forms of criminality, such as drug trafficking and tax fraud, making its combat all the more complex and essential. By strengthening cooperation mechanisms and continuously adapting legislative measures, it is possible to hope for a significant reduction in this scourge. Vigilance remains crucial to protect consumers, support legitimate businesses, and preserve the integrity of global economic markets.

Dreyfus law firm, with its expertise in intellectual property law, is committed to continuing the fight against counterfeiting and contributes every day to stopping infringements on your trademark, designs, as well as domain names…

Dreyfus law firm is in partnership with an international network of lawyers specialized in Intellectual Property.

Contact us and join us on social media!

Instagram
LinkedIn

 

Read More

Review of the effectiveness of the French law n° 2023-451 of 9 June 2023 regulating influencers after its first year of implementation

Written by Dreyfus01/10/2024

Image generated by DALL E 3 Microsoft Version

Background and Origins

On June 9, 2023, France enacted Law No. 2023-451, a pioneering piece of legislation aimed at regulating the commercial practices of influencers and protecting social media users. This law represents a significant step in regulating commercial influence and combating the abuses by influencers on various digital platforms.

Definitions and Objectives

In recent years, the sector of commercial influence has seen exponential growth but also significant deviations, ranging from the promotion of dangerous products to deceptive commercial practices. The Directorate General for Competition, Consumer Affairs, and Fraud Prevention (DGCCRF) conducted several investigations revealing increasing deceptive commercial practices. Simultaneously, the Professional Advertising Regulatory Authority (ARPP) had already established good practice rules and created an Observatory for Responsible Influence in 2019. However, these measures proved insufficient, prompting legislators to intervene more rigorously to regulate commercial influence and combat its abuses.

This new legislation is noteworthy for its role in regulating concepts increasingly integrated into our daily lives. Article 1 of the law precisely defines the term “influencer” as follows: “Individuals or legal entities who, for a fee, use their notoriety with their audience to communicate electronically to the public content aimed at directly or indirectly promoting goods, services, or a cause engage in the activity of commercial influence”. Additionally, the activity of influencer agents is now regulated by Article 7, which defines them as intermediaries representing influencers or facilitating their relations with advertisers while ensuring the compliance of their activities with the regulations in force.

In France, where the number of influencers is estimated at around 150,000, the behaviours of some have highlighted the need for stringent regulation to protect consumers, especially the younger one, who are highly susceptible to these new forms of advertising. With this context, the law mandates that platforms hosting influencer content identify and remove illegal materials while ensuring the transparency of commercial posts.

Influencers must now establish written contracts with advertisers, explicitly specifying the terms of their collaboration to ensure clarity and protection. Moreover, the law requires increased transparency: any publication must clearly indicate whether it is an “advertisement” or a “commercial collaboration” to avoid any confusion among consumers, in accordance with Article L. 121-3 of the Consumer Code.

Additionally, this legislation continues the efforts of the October 29, 2020, law by enhancing the protection of all sector actors, including minor influencers. Dedicated measures aim to secure the activity of child influencers on all digital platforms such as Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and extend the provisions initially provided for minor YouTubers by the October 19, 2020, law. Thus, these young influencers now benefit from the protections of the Labor Code. Their parents or legal guardians are required to sign contracts with advertisers, and a portion of the income generated is reserved for their future in the form of a nest egg.

Violations of these rules can result in severe penalties, including imprisonment of up to two years and fines of up to 300,000 euros. The law also establishes joint liability between the influencer, the advertiser, and their agent, ensuring that victims of abusive commercial practices can obtain effective redress.

Assessment After Several Months of Implementation of French Law No. 2023-451

Since its implementation, French Law No. 2023-451 has resulted in numerous sanctions against influencers for deceptive commercial practices. In response, online platforms have enhanced their monitoring policies to align with the new legislative standards.

Nevertheless, this law has encountered criticism from many content creators, who view it as an overly stringent government intervention. They contend that the swift enactment of this legislation may stifle creativity and innovation within the influencer marketing industry.

In response to these criticisms, a code of conduct for influencers has been developed. Although useful, this guide does not fully meet the legal requirements of Law No. 2023-451 and does not have the same legal standing as the legislation itself. However, it plays an important educational role by raising awareness among influencers about transparency and consumer protection issues. It also provides detailed explanations and practical tools, such as contract templates and compliance checklists.

In addition, the European Commission has expressed reservations about this law, suggesting that it may conflict with the Digital Services Act (DSA) and that it did not follow the notification procedure required by the Commission. As a result, the DDADUE law was promulgated on 22 April 2024 with the aim of revising the basic articles of the influencer legislation. This reform aims to align French legislation with European standards, including the E-Commerce Directive and the DSA, in order to ensure consistent regulation within the European Union.

Conclusion

Law no. 2023-451 represents a major step forward in the regulation of the commercial influence sector in France. While criticisms remain, the need to protect consumers and ensure greater transparency in the practices of influencers justifies these stringent measures. Future adjustments, in particular through the DDADUE law, will better harmonise French regulation with European standards and ensure uniform consumer protection across the European Union. Despite the criticism, the need to protect consumers and promote transparency in influencers’ advertising practices justifies the adoption of strict measures. Nevertheless, this regulation raises questions about its compliance with European directives, particularly with regard to freedom of expression and digital innovation.

Read More

Protect Your Company’s Image, Brands, and Domain Names with Our New Domain Name Monitoring Service!

Written by Dreyfus17/09/2024

In today’s digital environment, businesses are increasingly exposed to various risks related to the security of their online assets. Domain names, in particular, have become prime targets for cybercriminals and other malicious actors seeking to exploit a brand’s reputation or engage in cybersquatting. Aware of these challenges, Dreyfus Law Firm introduces its new Domain Name Monitoring Service, an innovative and comprehensive solution designed to proactively protect your company’s image, brands, and domain names.

 

The Importance of Domain Names in Today’s Digital Landscape

Domain names are much more than just a web address. They are your company’s gateway to the digital world, the online identity of your brand, and a key element of your business strategy. They convey your brand image, serve as a point of contact for your customers and partners, and are often integrated into your digital marketing efforts. However, the increased importance of domain names has also caught the attention of cybercriminals.

 

These actors exploit domain names in various ways to harm businesses. Whether through the creation of fraudulent websites using similar domain variations (a practice known as typosquatting) or by registering similar domains to lure your customers into phishing scams, the risks are real and multifaceted. Additionally, some malicious actors use these domains to set up email servers to launch deceptive email campaigns aimed at stealing sensitive information or spreading malware.

 

For all these reasons, proactive monitoring of your domain names has become an absolute necessity. Simply registering a domain name and assuming it is protected is no longer enough. You need to continuously monitor similar domain names, their usage, and their integrity, and be ready to react quickly if an issue arises. This is where Dreyfus Law Firm’s Domain Name Monitoring Service comes into play.

 

A Service Designed for Multi-Dimensional Protection

Our Domain Name Monitoring Service stands out for its holistic approach and its ability to cover all critical aspects of similar domain names. It is built on three main pillars: monitoring WHOIS records, online content publication, and email server activation associated with monitored domains.

 

  1. WHOIS Record Monitoring: WHOIS is a public directory containing information about domain name owners, including their contact details, domain creation and expiration dates, and other relevant details. By monitoring these records, we can immediately detect any unauthorized or suspicious changes that could indicate an attempt to take control of your domain (e.g., a change in ownership or DNS servers). This information is crucial for anticipating threats and taking necessary action before any damage is done.

 

  1. Online Content Publication Monitoring: Monitoring content published under domain names associated with your brand is equally essential. This pillar of the service focuses on detecting fraudulent, defamatory, or simply illegal content published on domains linked to your company. For example, a website that imitates yours and publishes false or malicious information can cause significant harm to your reputation. By quickly detecting content related to monitored domain names, we can promptly take the necessary legal action to have it removed.

 

  1. Email Server Activation Monitoring: Finally, one of the most insidious aspects of domain-related cyberattacks is the activation of email servers to launch phishing or spam campaigns. By monitoring the activation of these servers, we can detect and neutralize these threats to limit the risk of them reaching your customers or partners. This type of monitoring is especially important in a context where email remains one of the preferred attack vectors for cybercriminals.

 

Monitoring Tailored to Your Specific Needs

We understand that each company is unique and that digital security needs can vary greatly from one organization to another. That’s why our Domain Name Monitoring Service is fully customizable. We offer two monitoring frequencies: weekly or daily, depending on your specific needs and the level of risk you are exposed to.

 

– Weekly Monitoring: For companies whose domain names are less likely to be attacked or who have less sensitive digital assets, weekly monitoring may be sufficient. This monitoring mode allows for the detection of changes or suspicious activities regularly enough to anticipate and manage risks without requiring real-time monitoring.

 

– Daily Monitoring: For companies with highly sensitive digital assets or those operating in sectors where cybersecurity risks are particularly high, such as finance, healthcare, or e-commerce, daily monitoring is recommended. This mode allows for almost instant response to any suspicious changes, thereby limiting the risks of malicious exploitation of your domain names.

 

Two Operational Modes for Optimal Responsiveness

To better meet our clients’ expectations, we have designed two distinct operational modes for our Domain Name Monitoring Service:

 

  1. Automatic Notifications: This mode is ideal for companies that want to be informed in real-time of changes or suspicious activities related to their domain names. Whenever a modification is detected, whether it’s a change in WHOIS information, the publication of new online content, or the activation of email servers, you will be immediately alerted. This system allows you to react quickly to protect your rights and prevent irreversible damage to your brand or digital assets.

 

  1. Legal Analysis and Recommendations: This mode offers an even higher level of service by including the intervention of our legal experts. Each detected change is carefully reviewed by our team of lawyers, who assess the relevance of the changes and determine if they pose a threat to your company. If a risk is identified, we provide detailed recommendations on the actions to take to manage this threat. This approach allows you to benefit not only from real-time monitoring but also from tailored legal expertise, ensuring that you receive only relevant alerts and are fully equipped to anticipate and resolve issues related to monitored domain names.

 

Why Choose Dreyfus Law Firm’s Domain Name Monitoring Service?

Dreyfus Law Firm is distinguished by its expertise in intellectual property and cybersecurity, as well as its commitment to providing personalized solutions tailored to each client’s specific needs. By opting for our Domain Name Monitoring Service, you benefit from robust and effective protection against digital threats, supported by a team of experienced professionals.

 

Our holistic and proactive approach allows you to secure your domain names optimally, ensuring that every aspect of their use is monitored and protected. Additionally, our ability to offer in-depth legal analyses and personalized recommendations makes us a partner of choice for any company concerned with protecting its digital assets in an ever-evolving landscape.

Conclusion

In a world where digital threats are constantly evolving, it is essential not to leave certain domain names unmonitored. Dreyfus Law Firm’s Domain Name Monitoring Service is designed to provide you with peace of mind by ensuring continuous and proactive protection of your digital assets. Whether you choose automatic notifications or detailed legal analysis, you can count on our expertise to secure your domain names and protect your business from the growing risks of cyberspace.

 

Don’t wait to take action. Contact us today to learn more about our Domain Name Monitoring Service and discover how we can help you secure your digital assets for a safer and more secure future while keeping your budget under control.

Read More
Contact
Sign up for our newsletter and stay informed about the latest developments in intellectual property and the digital economy!
Facebook Twitter Instagram Linkedin

© 2024 Dreyfus – Created by Agence Peach