If It Works, Oppose It

The Court of First Instance's conclusion on the appeal inwards Case T-352/02 Creative Technology v OHIM, Ortiz was posted today. CT applied to register the give-and-take score PC WORK for "apparatus for recording, transmitting together with reproducing sound or images, loudspeakers, amplifiers, tape players, tape players, compact disc players, tuners, together with parts together with fittings for all the aforesaid goods" inwards Class 9. Ortiz opposed, citing his before registration of a Castilian figurative score for "electronic sound equipment; loudspeakers; sound reproducing apparatus; radio, boob tube together with video apparatus", likewise inwards Class 9. The Opposition Division upheld the opposition on the reason that at that topographic point was a likelihood of confusion betwixt them; the Board of Appeal agreed. So, dismissing the appeal, did the Court of First Instance. The CFI said, inwards paragraphs 48-49:

"the give-and-take ‘pc’ inwards the merchandise score applied for has a descriptive grapheme inwards relation to the goods concerned, being, both inwards English linguistic communication together with inwards Spanish, an abbreviation for ‘personal computer’. From the conceptual betoken of view, the distinctive chemical component of that score hence consists of the give-and-take ‘works’. In the illustration of the before mark, it must last held, ... inwards the absence of non‑verbal figurative elements having independent evocative force, that the dominant chemical component on a conceptual rank consists of the give-and-take ‘work’.

Secondly, it must last regarded every bit plausible, every bit the applicant itself seems to recognise, that the targeted public, existence made upwards of consumers familiar alongside the purpose of computers, has sufficient noesis of English linguistic communication to empathize the pregnant of the give-and-take ‘work’ together with to recognise its plural class inwards the give-and-take ‘works’".

is reluctant to guide maintain upshot alongside together with then many others, simply queries the conclusion that at that topographic point is a likelihood of confusion -- if entirely on the reason that he tried to last confused, simply failed.