EU trade mark dispute: €$ We Think for You

On 8 January, in case T-20/24, the General Court of the European Union rejected the application for registration of the EU trade mark nº 015225253, "€$ We Think for You".

In 2016, the Polish company Cinkciarz.pl sp. z o.o. applied to the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) for registration of the stylised slogan "€$ We Think for You" as an EU figurative mark, covering goods and services in various classes of the Nice Classification. In Class 9, it covered technology and computer-related goods, in particular in the field of financial and electronic transactions, as well as information services on monetary and financial matters. In Class 36, it included financial services, including the management of transfers and transactions in euros and dollars. Lastly, in Class 45, it covered security services, monitoring of security systems and break-ins, searches for stolen goods and similar services.

Both the examiner and the EUIPO Board of Appeal rejected the application under Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 on the grounds that the mark was devoid of any distinctive character. They considered that the mark would be perceived merely as a promotional statement that the provider of the goods and services offered under the mark thinks of the customer and, as a specialist in currency, financial transfers and transactions in euros and dollars, offers products and services that are particularly effective or suitable in these areas.

The Polish company appealed against the decision to the General Court of the European Union, which had to determine whether the mark had sufficient distinctive character to be registered or whether it should be considered merely a promotional slogan.

The General Court upheld the decision of the EUIPO Board of Appeal, pointing out that the mark in question had a purely promotional content, unfit for trade mark protection. In particular, it noted that the mark suggested that the company offered products and services specialised in monetary and financial matters, which reinforced the idea that it did not fulfil the function of indicating a specific commercial origin. It argued that the relevant public, in this case English-speaking consumers in the European Union, would not have to make any significant mental effort to interpret the mark, since its meaning was clear and direct. Therefore, it was considered that the mark would not be perceived as an indication of origin, but rather as a slogan highlighting the company's ability to provide reliable financial services. As a result, the General Court rejected the appeal in its entirety and confirmed that the mark "€$ We Think for You" did not meet the requirements for distinctiveness.