Table of Contents

Trademark Protection and Territoriality Challenges in a Global Economy

Trademark Protection and Territoriality Challenges in a Global Economy

Elgar Intellectual Property and Global Development series

Edited by Irene Calboli and Edward Lee

As the modern business world becomes increasingly decentralized and globally focused, traditional interpretations and applications of trademark protection law are facing greater and greater challenges. This is particularly true regarding the principle of trademark territoriality, which holds that trademark rights are bound by the laws of individual nations. This timely volume offers expert analyses of the challenges facing crucial aspects of trademark law from some of the most prominent scholars in the field.

Chapter 10: "La confusion des genres": logos and packaging as copyrighted works

Pierre-Emmanuel Moyse

Subjects: law - academic, intellectual property law, international economic law, trade law


On July 26, 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its long-awaited judgment in the case Kraft v. Euro-Excellence. It displays themes and interrogations similar to those presented in the copyright case Omega S.A. v. Costco Wholesale Corp., notably P.E.M. on the issue of misuse. Omega was decided by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, affirmed by the United States Supreme Court in 2010, and is now pending before the Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit after the case had been remanded to the District Court of California. Albeit obviously not subject to the exact same legislation, such grey market casesuniversally question the scope of protection of copyright law. They certainly beg the same question: to what extent can copyright law be used to control the parallel importation of consumable goods where the genuine product was first put on the market with the consent of the initial rightholder and producer of the good? In both cases referred to above, the plaintiffs were authorized distributors who claimed copyright protection in a logo affixed to the product they had manufactured or distributed. These cases hardly concern creativity, unless one considers the imagination deployed by the lawyers in devising such strategy to be a creative exploit. The objective in both instances was simply to exclude the unauthorized importer in order to create a distribution monopoly. The copyright infringement here takes a particularly unusual form: it is indirect, rather than direct, and extends to the product.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information