The General Court of the European Union, the court of first instance of the CJEU, has backed this Wednesday the publishing house responsible for the Astérix and Obélix comics against the registration as a trademark of the denomination 'Obelix' in favor of a Polish company dedicated to the manufacture of firearms, ammunition, and explosives.
The origin of the litigation is situated in 2022, when the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) authorized the registration of the trademark 'Obelix' to identify products in the arms sector, including explosives and ammunition.
The publisher of the Asterix and Obelix comic book collection challenged that resolution, but the EUIPO confirmed its criteria in all internal appeal phases, which led the company to finally go to European Justice.
Now, the European High Court decides to annul the decision of the EUIPO, which it criticizes for "an incomplete and erroneous analysis" when assessing the conflict between the two denominations (that of the character Obélix and the brand 'Obelix').
The ruling underlines that the European trademark office did not duly take into consideration various examples of products in which both terms appeared accompanied by the registered trademark symbol, a relevant element for assessing use and renown.
For the Court based in Luxembourg, the exclusion of the evidence in which said sign was used together with the sign Astérix was also not justified, since that combination does not prevent appreciating that the term 'Obelix' is perceived in an individualized manner, as its own mark, capable of having acquired notoriety.
In the same way, it concludes that EUIPO did not sufficiently analyze the relationship between the two opposing trademarks, whose characteristics may lead the relevant public to establish an association between them and to the detriment of the reputation of the earlier trademark.
Consequently, the resolution indicates that this assessment cannot be limited, as the EUIPO mistakenly did, to stating that there are too significant differences between the affected products and services and that the respective audiences do not coincide.
The European Court therefore holds that the possible existence of such a link must be assessed globally, taking into account all relevant factors, including the distinctive character, whether inherent or acquired through use, of the earlier mark.