This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CA0376
Case C-376/11: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Pie Optiek v Bureau Gevers, European Registry for Internet Domains (Internet — .eu Top Level Domain — Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 — Domain names — Phased registration — Article 12(2) — Concept of ‘licensees of prior rights’ — Person authorised by the proprietor of a trade mark to register, in his own name but on behalf of that proprietor, a domain name identical or similar to that trade mark — No authorisation for other uses of the sign as a trade mark)
Case C-376/11: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Pie Optiek v Bureau Gevers, European Registry for Internet Domains (Internet — .eu Top Level Domain — Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 — Domain names — Phased registration — Article 12(2) — Concept of ‘licensees of prior rights’ — Person authorised by the proprietor of a trade mark to register, in his own name but on behalf of that proprietor, a domain name identical or similar to that trade mark — No authorisation for other uses of the sign as a trade mark)
Case C-376/11: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Pie Optiek v Bureau Gevers, European Registry for Internet Domains (Internet — .eu Top Level Domain — Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 — Domain names — Phased registration — Article 12(2) — Concept of ‘licensees of prior rights’ — Person authorised by the proprietor of a trade mark to register, in his own name but on behalf of that proprietor, a domain name identical or similar to that trade mark — No authorisation for other uses of the sign as a trade mark)
SL C 295, 29.9.2012, p. 15–15
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
29.9.2012 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 295/15 |
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Pie Optiek v Bureau Gevers, European Registry for Internet Domains
(Case C-376/11) (1)
(Internet - .eu Top Level Domain - Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 - Domain names - Phased registration - Article 12(2) - Concept of ‘licensees of prior rights’ - Person authorised by the proprietor of a trade mark to register, in his own name but on behalf of that proprietor, a domain name identical or similar to that trade mark - No authorisation for other uses of the sign as a trade mark)
2012/C 295/24
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Cour d’appel de Bruxelles
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Pie Optiek
Defendants: Bureau Gevers, European Registry for Internet Domains
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Interpretation of Articles 12(2) and 21(1)(a) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 of 28 April 2004 laying down public policy rules concerning the implementation and functions of the.eu Top Level Domain and the principles governing registration (OJ 2004 L 162, p. 40) — Interpretation of Article 4(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 733/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 April 2002 on the implementation of the.eu Top Level Domain (OJ 2002 L 113, p. 1) — Speculative and abusive registrations — Concept of ‘licensees of prior rights’ — Person authorised by the proprietor of a trade mark to register, in his own name but on behalf of the licensor, a domain name identical or similar to the trade mark, in the absence of any other use of the sign as a trade mark — Name registered without ‘rights or legitimate interest’
Operative part of the judgment
The third subparagraph of Article 12(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 of 28 April 2004 laying down public policy rules concerning the implementation and functions of the.eu Top Level Domain and the principles governing registration must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation where the prior right concerned is a trade mark right, the words ‘licensees of prior rights’ do not refer to a person who has been authorised by the proprietor of the trade mark concerned solely to register, in his own name but on behalf of that proprietor, a domain name identical or similar to that trade mark, but without that person being authorised to use the trade mark commercially in a manner consistent with its functions.