Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-02-Speech-2-300"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011002.14.2-300"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, I would like briefly to outline the underlying issues and the main points of my report. The central statement is that the Commission is called upon to produce a detailed study of the possible implications of the transition to the principle of international exhaustion by 31 December 2002. The Nera study presented by the Commission in 1999 fails to deal with this matter adequately. A trade mark right has its effects only in the territory for which it was granted. Community exhaustion applies to the Community mark and national marks when the holder of the right has put his product into circulation in the Community for the first time. If the holder of the trade mark right puts his product into circulation outside the Community, the legal effects of the marks are not exhausted in the Community. He can therefore prevent parallel importers from importing the product into the Community. Because of the current Community-wide exhaustion regime he can therefore quote two different prices: a lower one for countries outside the Community and a higher one for the Community itself.
This split pricing policy, however, is not what the trade mark right is about. The main purpose of the mark is to make the product distinguishable and familiar and to indicate a certain product quality. We could also speak about the advertising effect. The division of markets to the disadvantage of consumers in the Community cannot be the objective of granting a Community trade mark. Neither is there anything in competition law to argue against parallel imports. So why should it be possible to use trade mark rights to prevent them? There is something wrong there.
We must do something to get back to more competition and lower prices for branded goods. The same conclusion was reached in a study by the Swedish competition authority, as, too, did a discussion paper by the Irish competition authority. A hearing before a Select Committee of the British House of Commons was also presented predominantly with arguments in favour of international exhaustion.
There is now an important new factor: the increasing amount of trade on the Internet. The present exhaustion regime could hamper the development of
commerce. It is not in fact certain whether Internet sales with the subsequent dispatch of branded goods are permissible under trade mark law. But legal certainty and consumer protection are essential conditions for the development of trade over the Internet.
Then there are the following points. There are a) trade marks that are not really matched to any particular product. For example, you order ‘a Siemens’. ‘A Siemens’ can be a lamp, a washing machine or a nuclear power station. There are b) also trade marks that designate group products, for example Adidas shoes, whether they are sandals or high heels. There are c) trade marks that require absolute identity, in medicine for example. It cannot be even one milligram different from what the mark designates.
All these points are reason enough to call on the Commission to undertake its own comprehensive study. Such a study must also draw comparisons with the world’s major trading nations and study and make a precise analysis of the implications for the EU labour market."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"e"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples