News & Analysis
- Data & Tools
- Login | Register
In <i>Firmakatalogen AS v Findexa AS</i>, the Norwegian Court of Appeal has overturned an earlier decision and has ordered the cancellation of the respondent's GULE SIDER (meaning 'yellow pages') mark. It ruled that GULE SIDER was descriptive and that the respondent had not established that the relevant trade circle knew that it owned the mark.
05 April 2005
The Norwegian Supreme Court has upheld a decision ruling that the use by an importer of Volvo cars of the domain name 'volvoimport.no' infringed Sections 4 and 6 of the Norwegian Trademarks Act. The court ruled, among other things, that the use of 'volvoimport.no' was not necessary to promote the defendant as an independent importer.
03 February 2005
The Oslo District Court has ordered the transfer of the domain name 'google.no' from a Norwegian company to US search engine company Google Inc. Even though the mark GOOGLE and the domain name 'google.no' are not used in relation to identical or similar goods and services, the court found that there was a likelihood of confusion as the mark GOOGLE is also its owner's company name.
27 October 2004
In <i>Bayerische Motoren Werke AG v Cellus Norge AS</i>, the Oslo City Court has ruled that the defendant's sale of logos and wallpapers for mobile phones that included the plaintiff's famous BMW logo infringed the plaintiff's trademark rights. The court accepted the defendant's proposal that it pay Nkr20,000 in compensation to the plaintiff.
13 September 2004
The Norwegian Supreme Court has reversed a Court of Appeal ruling that parallel importer Paranova’s design used on repackaged boxes of Merck’s products infringed Merck’s trademark. Instead of considering whether the repackaging and design were necessary to enter the Norwegian market, the Supreme Court considered the interests of both parties and held that Paranova’s design was not liable to damage Merck’s reputation or that of its trademark.
08 July 2004
Amendments to the Norwegian Company Trade Name Regulation have come into force. The amendments have removed the requirement that a company name must be distinctive before it can be registered. The only requirement now is that the company name is not identical to an existing company name.
17 May 2004
In <i>Trip Trap Denmark A/S v Stokke Gruppen AS</i>, the Court of Appeal has reversed a decision to partly cancel the registration of the mark TRIPP TRAPP for furniture. The court held that the registration should be maintained for all goods in relation to which it was registered, even though it was used only for children's chairs.
08 April 2004
Parties wishing to register domain names incorporating Norwegian characters have only until the end of the week to do so. Norid - the administrator of the country-code top-level domain '.no' - started accepting registrations this morning on a first come, first served basis. It will close registration at 4pm on February 13.
09 February 2004
In <i>Paranova AS v Merck & Co</i>, the European Free Trade Association Court has clarified the circumstances in which a trademark owner may legitimately oppose a parallel importer's use of its own design on repackaged goods.
31 October 2003
A new domain name dispute resolution policy governing the '.no' country-code top-level domain has come into force in Norway. The new policy is inspired by ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy and has seen the creation of a domain name dispute resolution board, which will assist in solving domain name conflicts under the '.no' ccTLD.
27 October 2003
Get unlimited access to all WTR content