Verisure’s ZEROVISION mark found to be descriptive for smoke machines and security systems

Verisure’s ZEROVISION mark found to be descriptive for smoke machines and security systems

In a blow to international security company Verisure, the Oslo District Court has upheld the refusal to register the mark ZEROVISION for smoke machines in Class 7 and security systems in Class 9.

On 17 June 2022 the Oslo District Court handed down its decision in the dispute between Verisure Sàrl and the Norwegian State/Board of Appeal for Industrial Property Rights (KFIR) (21-181946TVI-TOSL/04) regarding Verisure’s application for the word mark ZEROVISION for, among others, security systems (Class 9) and smoke machines (Class 7). Specifically, the question before the court was whether ZEROVISION was inherently descriptive – and not devoid of any distinctive character – for the goods applied for.

Background

Verisure is an international security company that sells alarm systems for companies and private homes. Verisure offers a smoke machine – sold under the mark ZEROVISION – as part of its product range related to alarm systems. When the smoke machine is triggered, it releases a dense fog that is supposed to restrict a burglar’s capability to move in situ.

Verisure applied for registration of the word mark ZEROVISION in Norway for the above-mentioned goods based on a Spanish registration dated 20 October 2017. Both the Norwegian Industrial Property Office (NIPO) and the KFIR rejected the application on the ground that ZEROVISION was devoid of any distinctive character (descriptive).

The KFIR’s decision was challenged by Verisure and brought before the Oslo District Court, which issued its decision on 17 June 2022.

Decision

In order to register a trademark in Norway, the mark must not be devoid of distinctive character (descriptive) and must be distinctive for the relevant goods and/or services.

In the present case, the Oslo District Court found that ZEROVISION would be perceived as being descriptive for machines that generate artificial smoke. In its assessment, the court emphasised that the intended purpose of such machines is to create smoke and affect visibility. In this context, ZEROVISION could be perceived as a quality indicator for such machines, as it proclaims to result in no vision at all.

Further, the court established that alarms that generate smoke are a common type of security alarms. On this basis, the court also found that ZEROVISION would be perceived as being descriptive of security alarm systems, since the mark indicates the intended purpose of one typical type of alarm system. Thus, the fact that ZEROVISION was not descriptive for other types of security alarm systems was not decisive (paradoxically, for even more common video surveillance systems, the term ‘zerovision’ would arguably not be considered as a quality indicator at all). According to the court, the average consumer would perceive ZEROVISION as an indication and description of the type of security alarm system, and not as a badge of commercial origin.

Verisure had also argued that, since the mark was registered in other jurisdictions, the application should also be allowed on Norway. In response, the court pointed out that it is the application of the law that is supposed to be harmonised under EU trademark law, not the results. However, this raises certain questions on the application of the principle of harmonisation in Norwegian trademark law. Arguably, according to a certain reading of previous Norwegian case law, the outcome in specific cases regarding similar trademarks in other jurisdictions may be of relevance – even if merely as a supportive argument.

The court thus concluded that ZEROVISION did not meet the registrability requirements under the Norwegian Trademarks Act.

The decision may still be appealed.

  • Verisure applied for registration of the word mark ZEROVISION for smoke machines in Class 7 and security systems in Class 9
  • The application was rejected by the NIPO and the KFIR on the ground that the mark was devoid of any distinctive character
  • The Oslo District Court agreed, finding, among other things, that the average consumer would perceive ZEROVISION as a description of the type of security system

This article first appeared in WTR Daily, part of World Trademark Review, in July 2022. For further information, please go to www.worldtrademarkreview.com.

Julius Berg Kaasin is recognised by IAM Patent 1000

Julius Berg Kaasin is recognised by IAM Patent 1000

The world’s leading patent professionals are identified each year by IAM Patent 1000.

In this year’s edition of IAM Patent 1000, Julius is recognised both within Patents / IP and Transactions (IP-related). He achieves the rankings “Recommended Expert” and “Recommended Individual”, and he is described as following:

Flying the flag of Brækhus Advokatfirma, Julius Berg Kaasin has a well-rounded practice encompassing patents, trademarks and copyrights, as well as deep knowledge of trade secrets and technology rights. As a result, he is the perfect adviser for companies looking to establish, enforce or commercialize their assets.

IAM Patent 1000

The 2022-edition of IAM Patent 1000 for Norway is available here

IAM is a trusted source of worldwide news, analysis and data on the management of intellectual property. Their annual ranking identify leading patent firms and individuals around the world.

The rankings are based on an extensive qualitative work that emphasizes in-depth knowledge, presence in the market and positive feedback from peers in the industry. The ranking is conducted independently of commercial considerations.

Finansavisen’s annual lawyer survey ranks several of Brækhus’ lawyers as leading experts in their field

Finansavisen’s annual lawyer survey ranks several of Brækhus’ lawyers as leading experts in their field

For the 24th year in a row, Finansavisen’s lawyer survey acknowledges the leading Norwegian lawyers and firms in a number of categories, and Brækhus’ lawyers are recognised as some of the country’s leading lawyers in their field of expertise.

Stein E. Hove is ranked as number ten on the list of the country’s leading lawyers within Technology and Digitalisation and Christian Bendiksen as fifth on the list of “Promising Talents” within the same category. Christoph Morck, who primarily works with cross-border M&A, company law, and construction, is member of the international Board of Directors at the premier global legal network Meritas. Christoph is ranked as number five in the category of Norway’s leading international lawyers.

Brækhus tops several of the lists among this year’s “Promising Talents”. Marcus Lindstrøm is recognised as leading within Construction, and Julius Berg Kaasin is recognised as leading within Trade and fourth within IP. Frank C. Aase is recognised as leading within two categories, Banking and Finance, and Restructuring and Insolvency.

Managing Partner Frank C. Aase.

“It is fantastic to see that our lawyers are recognised amongst the country’s most competent lawyers within their field of expertise. Brækhus has strong competencies within construction, banking and finance, restructuring and insolvency, technology and digitalisation, trade and IP, in addition to a solid international presence. The survey confirms our strengths, which is the result of long-term and targeted teamwork” says Managing Partner Frank C. Aase.

New rules strengthen the fight against illegal counterfeit goods

New rules strengthen the fight against illegal counterfeit goods

On 1 July 2021, new rules in the Customs Act enter into force intended to strengthen proprietors’ possibilities to protect their intellectual property rights (IP rights), including trademark, design, patent and copyright, and that combat illegal counterfeits pursuant to the Marketing Control Ac

The new rules simplify and streamline Norwegian Customs’ possibilities for detention and destruction of imported or exported goods infringing intellectual Property Rights, based on a model from the European Court of Justice. The changes will involve a considerable simplification compared to the current scheme and there are three changes in particular that will be of significance to proprietors.

1. Simplified approach to destruction of illegal counterfeits

The new rules entail a simplified approach to the destruction of consignments of illegal counterfeit goods, generally. According to the current rules, Norwegian Customs is required to notify both the proprietor and the recipient if it is suspected that an importation or exportation constitutes an intellectual property infringement. In principle, the goods can then be held for ten days, but in order for Norwegian Customs to be able to destroy the consignment, this has to be based on a decision from the courts in an infringement case (typically what is known as an ‘interim injunction’) or the written consent of the recipient. Once the new rules enter into force, however, failure of the recipient to reply within the ten-day time limit will be considered tacit consent for the destruction of the goods. This scheme thereby simplifies Norwegian Customs’ control, which can in many cases be an effective tool. If the recipient believes the consignment does not infringe any intellectual property rights, the person concerned will be encouraged to follow-up the enquiry, and if the good is wrongfully destroyed, the recipient will have a claim for damages against the proprietor, since the destruction occurs at the proprietor’s expense and risk.

According to the prevailing legislation, only goods being imported or exported can be detained by Norwegian Customs. However, the new rules also allow for the possibility to detain goods in transit. This only applies, however, if the trademark in question enjoys protection in the destination country.

2. Simplified approach to the destruction of small consignments

Additionally, separate rules are being introduced for the destruction of what is known as ‘small consignments’. According to the new rules, small consignments will include post or courier consignments that contain five or fewer units, or that have a gross weight of less than three kilograms. This is practical in light of the increase in online shopping globally, where illegal counterfeit goods are also shipped as small consignments, often in an attempt to circumvent the condition that the consignment has to be considered shipped as part of business activities (see also point 3, below, regarding the introduction of what is known as the ‘Rolex Rule’). Furthermore, enforcement in relation to such small consignments risks becoming disproportionately resource-intensive for the proprietor in relation to the value and scope of the goods being shipped.

Therefore, an additional simplification for small consignments is being introduced. The most important difference from the ordinary simplified approach is that the proprietor does not have to be notified and confirm that an infringement applies in the individual case or give (tacit) consent to the destruction of the goods. The proprietor may, nevertheless, demand to receive a notification regarding destroyed goods, and shall be notified if the recipient has objections to destruction. In the latter case, the proprietor has a time limit of ten days to document that an infringement case has been instituted, and the goods will be released if no documentation has been submitted by the expiry of the time limit.

3. It is sufficient for detention and destruction that either the sender or the recipient is carrying out business activities

It is only the importing and exporting of illegal counterfeit goods in business activities that are prohibited. This does not entail a ban on private importing and according to the current rules, it can be challenging to enforce rights in relation to consignments that contain few illegal counterfeit goods if the recipient or sender is a private individual.

Based on the model from the European Court of Justice’s case C-98/13 Rolex, a new rule is now being introduced entailing that it is sufficient that either the sender or recipient of the goods is a business operator, in order for the importation or exportation to be considered part of business activities (‘Rolex Rule’). In this decision, the European Court of Justice determined that the consignment containing a counterfeit Rolex watch to a private individual represented an infringement against watch manufacturer Rolex’s trademark rights because the sender was carrying out business activities.

Brækhus’ IP experts have extensive experience in assisting proprietors in relation to Norwegian Customs in cases concerning counterfeit goods, and in cases concerning parallel import and the regulatory framework relating to the importing or exporting of goods. Contact us for a conversation about how the new rules may present opportunities for your business.

Brækhus launches Brækhus IP – portfolio services for trademark and design registrations

Brækhus launches Brækhus IP – portfolio services for trademark and design registrations

In 2021 Brækhus Advokatfirma strengthened its focus on IP and marketing law with the recruitment of IP-expert Julius Berg Kaasin. Julius heads the newly launched portfolio services for trademark and design registrations – Brækhus IP.

Brækhus IP is a portfolio service for trademarks and designs that provides companies with confidence that their commercial values are protected in an orderly and effective manner. Based on the company’s business goals, Brækhus’ experienced IP lawyers works closely with the company to ensure the protection of critical areas of the business. This ensures good IP strategy processes aligned with the company’s business strategy.

By registering a trademark or design through Brækhus, Brækhus will handle:

  • Preparation of IP strategy and mapping of your intellectual assets
  • Assessment and submission of trademark and design registrations
  • Handling of international trademark and design registrations, including EU trademarks and EU designs, also drawing upon our international network of lawyers
  • Follow-up of rights after registration
  • Renewals
  • Changes to registrations

In addition to the portfolio service Brækhus IP, Brækhus offer legal services within all areas of intellectual property rights (trademark, patent, design and copyright), as well as related areas of law such as marketing law and trade secrets. Read more about this here.