Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 19 SEPTEMBER 2011

Cross-Border Injunctions Tested In Apple V. Samsung Saga

Van Bael & Bellis
Van Bael & Bellis
Contributor
Van Bael & Bellis

Van Bael & Bellis

Van Bael & Bellis is a leading independent law firm headquartered in Brussels with offices in...

View firm profile
Explore more from Van Bael & Bellis

Two preliminary procedures pitting Apple Inc. ("Apple") against Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd ("Samsung Korea") and its affiliates illustrate interesting aspects of cross-border injunctions in the EU. Both procedures, one before the district court of Düsseldorf (Landesgericht Düsseldorf -the "German Court") and the other before the court of the Hague (Rechtbank ‘s Gravenhage – the "Dutch Court"), resulted in sharply contrasting decisions.

European UnionIntellectual Property
Peter L'Ecluse
Peter L'Ecluse
Author LinkedIn connections

Two preliminary procedures pitting Apple Inc. ("Apple") against Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd ("Samsung Korea") and its affiliates illustrate interesting aspects of cross-border injunctions in the EU. Both procedures, one before the district court of Düsseldorf (Landesgericht Düsseldorf -the "German Court") and the other before the court of the Hague (Rechtbank 's Gravenhage – the "Dutch Court"), resulted in sharply contrasting decisions.

Before the German Court, Apple had initiated ex parte proceedings against Samsung Korea and Samsung's German affiliate to block the launch of a specific tablet computer (the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1) in the EU. Apple claimed that the tablet infringed its registered Community design rights. For this purpose, Apple requested a preliminary injunction against the marketing of the product in any EU Member State, except for The Netherlands.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

No Free Rides On Reputed Marks: The CJEU’s Balancing Act Between Trademark Rights And Political Expression In Inter IKEA Systems v Vlaams Belang

The Court of Justice of the European Union has delivered a landmark ruling on whether political parties may invoke freedom of expression to justify using reputed trademarks in their campaigns. When Belgian political party Vlaams Belang adopted the IKEA trademark for its immigration reform programme, Inter IKEA Systems challenged the use, forcing European courts to balance intellectual property rights against fundamental freedoms. The judgment establishes a nuanced framework requiring case-by-case assessment
BelgiumIntellectual Property
Mamo TCV Advocates
Mamo TCV Advocates
Article

CJEU Establishes Framework For Balancing Trademark Rights And Freedom Of Expression

The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled on whether political expression and parody can justify the unauthorized use of a reputed trademark, examining the balance between intellectual property rights and freedom of speech. The case arose from a Belgian political party's immigration campaign that adopted IKEA's branding without permission, prompting Inter IKEA to bring infringement proceedings.
European UnionIntellectual Property
Greenberg Traurig
Greenberg Traurig
Article

Screws Loose? The CJEU Weighs In On A Trade Mark Parody Gone Political

The Court of Justice of the European Union has delivered a landmark judgment addressing whether political parody and freedom of expression can justify the unauthorized use of a famous trade mark. When Belgian political party Vlaams Belang appropriated IKEA's distinctive branding to promote its immigration reform programme, the resulting legal battle forced European courts to balance fundamental rights: the trade mark owner's property rights against the political actor's freedom of expression.
BelgiumIntellectual Property
ALTIUS
ALTIUS
Article

Political Parody Can Be A ‘due Cause’ Defense Against Trademark Dilution Claims

The Court of Justice of the European Union has issued a landmark ruling on whether political parties can use reputable trademarks for parody or campaigning purposes under EU trademark law. The case examines a Belgian political party's IKEA-themed immigration campaign and establishes new criteria for balancing trademark rights against freedom of expression. National courts must now weigh multiple factors including intent, contribution to public debate, and potential brand damage when assessing such uses.
BelgiumIntellectual Property
Winston Taylor
Winston Taylor
Article

IKEA Bans Parody: Freedom Of Expression Must Yield To Trademark

When Belgian political party Vlaams Belang used IKEA's trademark and drawings in an anti-immigration campaign, it sparked a landmark EU court decision on the boundaries between political expression and trademark rights. The Court of Justice examined whether political parody provides "due cause" for using another's trademark, weighing freedom of expression against property rights in a case where the trademark owner maintained neutrality on the political message.
BelgiumIntellectual Property
Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA)
Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA)