Region: Denmark

T-shirt design protected as an unregistered Community design

In <i>Bestseller A/S vs. Coop Danmark A/S and Natex of Scandinavia A/S</i>, the Supreme Court agreed with the Maritime and Commercial Court that the t-shirts were not protected by copyright but enjoyed protection as unregistered Community design. However, it went on to find that Coop and Natex should not have known about Bestseller’s designs when importing the t-shirts to Denmark.

02 January 2008

Use of Mokka following the termination of a license to use AMOKKA constitutes trademark infringement

In <i>Scanomat A/S vs. Restaurationsaktieselskabet Dag Hammarskjölds Allé af 18/8-2004</i>, the Maritime and Commercial Court did not find that Scanomat had proven either to have suffered any loss or any market disturbance by the infringing use of Dag H. Irrespective of the testimony by an expert witness that comparable royalty rates in the franchise business range from 12-15% of the revenue, the court awarded compensation with DKK 300,000 (about EUR 40,000) corresponding to approx 5% of the revenue of Dag H during the minimum period of infringement.

01 January 2008

Domain name should be transferred to United Parcel Service of America

In <i>United Parcel Service of America Inc. vs. Data4u by Jan Normand Andersen</i>, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court found that Data4u did not have a creditable interest in maintaining registration of the inactive domain name whereas United Parcel Service clearly had a need in using the domain name.

01 January 2008

Supreme Court rules that employees can listen to music without paying royalties

The Supreme Court has held that the playing of music via TV, radio and CD players is not to be considered public performance of music, as according to practice transmission of music to less than 40 persons is not considered “public performance".

01 January 2008

Joint rights in software inter partes between a software developer and its customer

The Maritime and Commercial Court has found that the rights in a piece of co-written software was held jointly by the parties in equal shares. The parties may thus jointly have claimed royalties from third parties, but not from each other without separate agreement hereon.

01 January 2008

Prelude publication is considered copyright infringement of corresponding hymn

The High Court found the publication of a prelude was a rewriting of the hymn and not exempted by the right to quotation. Further, the Court found no basis to establish that the defendant should be precluded from enforcing its copyrights through an established practice of publishing preludes without the payment of royalties.

01 January 2008

PR device mark constitutes trademark infringement of RR device mark

In <i>Rolls-Royce PLC and Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Ltd vs. PR Chokolade A/S</i>, the Maritime and Commercial Court found that the RR trademark has a reputation in Denmark, and further stated that even though the use of the RR trademark in Denmark is very limited – and perhaps exactly because the use of the trademark is Denmark is very limited - the trademark has become associated with prestige, luxury and quality.

01 January 2008

Distribution of MP3 players constitutes infringement of Community design

In <i>Creative Technology Ltd. vs. Garder A/S</i> the Supreme Court found that the design rights belongs to Creative Technology, as to lack of proof to the opposite, that the design of Garder's MP3 player is identical with the design of Creative Technology and that Garder intentionally infringed the design rights of Creative Technology as Garder in the installation guide for its MP3 player referred to the MP3 player of Creative Technology.

01 January 2008

Compensation for patent infringement should be calculated on the basis of the market value of the ad

In an infringement action against a machine manufacturer, POMI, and a machine pool, Breum, the parties agreed before the Supreme Court on the questions of validity and infringement, and the Court was consequently only to decide on the question of damages and compensation.

01 January 2008

Distribution of lamps not a violation of good marketing practice

In <i>Herstal Lampe Design A/S vs. Hagro by Hans Grove and Silvan-kæden A/S</i>, the Supreme Court found in favor of Hagro and Silvan, stating that 3 of the Herstal lamps did not have sufficient distinctiveness to enjoy protection against product imitation under the Danish Marketing Act. The remaining 2 lamps had sufficient distinctiveness, but the corresponding Hagro lamps were not considered sufficiently close to be considered illegal product imitations.

01 January 2008

Unlock unlimited access to all IAM content