Available in 3D
Partner Fábio Leme and associate Nelsa Barroso of Daniel Advogados compare the registration process of 3D trademarks in Brazil and France

In Brazil, three-dimensional trademarks are those that are recognised by the shape of a product or the packaging that covers it. Classic examples are Toblerone chocolate, Yakult and the original Coca-Cola bottle. It has been frequently discussed, including in Brazil, as to whether a possible technical effect present in the shape of the product or in its packaging would invalidate this shape as a 3D trademark.

In its Manual of Trademarks, the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO) declares that “to be registrable, the distinctive three-dimensional shape of a product or service should be dissociated from the technical effect.”

With all due respect, we do not agree with this position. We consider that any potential technical effect existing in the shape of a product does not remove any possible distinctive character from this visual perspective.

3D trademarks are those that are recognised by the public from the actual shape of the product. In other words, they are marks that are immediately identifiable by the consumer just from the design of the product, without any need of any other element or distinctive mark in their make-up. Therefore, if the shape of a product fulfills this function (distinctiveness), it is our understanding that there can be no reason to forbid or prohibit its registration as a 3D trademark.

Recently, one of our clients requested, in some countries, the registration as a 3D trademark of the shape of its latest model of a hermetic compressor for refrigeration. It is important to clarify that the design of the respective product is absolutely innovative and completely different from the shape, design or common form of this product in the market. Hermetic compressors typically have conventional rounded shapes similar to a globe, as occurs with our client’s other models.

There can be no doubt that when the consumer encounters the original design of our client’s product he will recognise it, identifying moreover its origin or source. It is a highly innovative shape and totally different from the conventional designs still used by its competitors for the same product. The registration application for this 3D trademark is still awaiting examination by the BPTO in Brazil. However, in France, the application was rejected by the local trademark office in a first examination of the merits.

Issued in mid-March 2014, the decision of provisional refusal was a major surprise. It was based on the examiner’s understanding that the trademark should be considered devoid of distinctive character because it represents the actual image of the product that it intends to protect and is therefore incapable of performing the function of designating its origin. On researching the jurisprudence in France, we noticed that this type of decision was common there and that the chances of a reversal were low. Claims for 3D trademarks are rarely made in the country and therefore the principle of the 3D trademark is rarely explored by doctrine or jurisprudence.

As a result, at appellate level, our office consequently spared no effort in seeking support in order to convince the French examiner that the shape of the client’s product differed significantly from the shape generally used for this product in the market. A large amount of documentation was attached to the appeal demonstrating the conventional and usual shapes used by its competitors in their hermetic compressors.

Accordingly, it was argued that the registration application for the client’s 3D trademark was in complete harmony with that set out in Article 711-1 of the French law of trademarks, which established that a trademark of a product or service can be considered a mark capable of graphic representation in the following terms: “Figurative marks such as: labels, seals, selvedges, embossments, holograms, logotypes, synthesised images; shapes, particularly those of a product or its packaging or those that identify a service; arrangements, combinations or tonalities of colour”.

If French law admits the shape of a product for registration as a trademark, it does not make any sense to refuse or reject an application for a 3D trademark based on the foundation that the trademark should be considered devoid of distinctive character because it represents the actual image of the product. Therefore, the decision to reject the registration previously issued by the French trademark office was at odds with the local rule. However, fortunately the appeal against the rejection presented to the French trademark office was granted and the registration application of the client’s 3D trademark was approved, resulting in a significantly useful administrative jurisprudence.

For us, in Brazil, the case is of interest and contributes to removing a certain resistance that we also feel when trying to obtain protection for the shape of products or their packaging as 3D trademarks. The Brazilian legislation is very similar to the French.

It is necessary to remove barriers for the protection of shapes that have sufficient distinctiveness as 3D trademarks in Brazil and other locations, even if they are associated with a technical effect. There is an opening here for double protection: one for the shape of the product as a 3D trademark and another for the technical effect by means of patent.
The latest features from IPPro The Internet
The US has listed Alibaba’s Taobao marketplace on its notorious markets list for the first time in four years. Alibaba’s Matthew Bassiur discusses why these negative feelings might be misdirected
Rights holders that want to protect their valuable intellectual property have to be willing to change
Join Our Newsletter

Sign up today and never
miss the latest news or an issue again

Subscribe now
Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms are not being used to their full potential, according to IPzen’s Julia Cytrynbaum
India's copyright societies are subject to interim measures that boost transparency. DPS Parmar and Aniruddh Singh of LexOrbis report
Courts are wrestling with the legal definition of users of social networks. Nathalie Dreyfus examines how they have done so far
The BRICS IP Forum and the IP Summit allowed intellectual property professionals to reflect on a topsy-turvy 2016, and hope for a simpler 2017
Experts discuss what brands can do to protect their trademarks online during the Cyber Monday sales, with fakes widely available
TM Cloud’s Practice Guide is the latest addition to a system that can help brands achieve robust protection in a world reliant on brand power
Country profiles
The latest country profiles from IPPro The Internet
While Indian fair use is not explicit, provisions exist for the fair dealing of copyright. Rohit Singh and Tina Canneth of Abu-Ghazeleh Intellectual Property delve deeper
An interpretation of the current events exception in Radosavljević is creative, say BDK Advokati's Bogdan Ivanišević and Marko Popović
IPPro Patents

Visit our sister site
for all the latest IP patents news and analysis

Yu-Li Tsai of Deep & Far examines how damages are calculated in patent infringement litigation
A recent amendment will make costly annulments a thing of the past. Gilberto Sanchez of SPECyF explains
New legislation in Turkey promises a swathe of trademark changes. Dr Cahit Suluk of Cahit Suluk Intellectual Property Law Firm explains
A trademark decision clarified ‘against the public order’ as an absolute ground for refusal. Sár and Partners – Danubia Patent & Law Office reports
Bogdan Ivanišević and Marko Popović of BDK Advokati review the recent squabble about copyright protection for ‘routinely created photos’
Alston & Bird recently expanded with a new office focusing on counselling Chinese companies on US intellectual property law. Yitai Hu explains what patent owners face when working across borders
The latest interviews from IPPro The Internet