INTA Files Amicus Brief Relating to the Trademark Registration of Personal Names
02-Sep-2026
|
Source : The International Trademark Association (INTA)
|
Visits : 90
NEW YORK - The International Trademark Association (INTA) has filed an amicus brief (Statement of Intervention) with the General Court of the European Union (GC) in relation to an appeal against the decision (case T-137/26) of the Grand Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of December 19, 2025, which rejected the trademark application of “George Orwell”, according to the official website of INTA.
The case relates to the registrability of a word mark consisting of the name of a famous British Author (GEORGE ORWELL) for—inter alia—books, prints, newspapers, CDs, digital recordings, entertainment and cultural or educational activities. The EUIPO in the first instance partly rejected the application according to Articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c) EU Trademark Regulation (EUTMR), which prohibit the registration of trademarks that are devoid of distinctive character, or that are purely descriptive.
The EUIPO argued that for the English-speaking public in the European Union (namely, Ireland and Malta) would immediately understand the sign as meaning the famous writer George Orwell, the pseudonym of Eric Arthur Blair, who was born in 1903 in Motihari, India, and who died in 1950 in London, England. While this name, like “Shakespeare” or “Hitchcock,” may perfectly serve to designate the commercial origin of paints, clothing, or pencils, it would not be distinctive for books or films.
INTA filed written observations during the proceedings before the EUIPO in support of the applicant, who contested the rejection by an appeal within the Office. The Board of Appeal in charge noted that there had been diverging decisions with respect to the registrability of titles of books and names of well-known characters of literary and artistic works for certain goods and services and referred the case to the Grand Board of Appeal (GBoA). By the contested ruling, the GBoA upheld the examiner’s decision, mainly on the grounds of George Orwell’s fame and reputation as a writer.
In the Statement in Intervention filed with the GC, INTA took the following position:
Personal names are distinctive per se. They are expressly quoted in Article 4 of the European Trademark Regulation as being capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings.
Signs consisting of names of famous persons do not lose such capacity. They should be treated like other trademarks for which fame and reputation serve to enhance the degree of distinctiveness.
There are many examples in which personal names have been registered and served as trademarks: “Citroën,” “Ferrari,” “Porsche,” or “Opel” for cars and vehicles, “Giorgio Armani,” “Chanel,” “Christian Dior,” “Karl Lagerfeld,” or “Versace” for clothing and perfumes; “Louis Vuitton” for bags and leather goods, “Michelin” for tires and maps, and “Roger Federer” or “Carlos Alcaraz” for sporting clothes, accessories and related services.
The world of literature makes no difference as can been seen from EU-mark registrations for “Albert Camus,” “Agatha Christie,” “Charles Dickens,” “Umberto Eco,” “Ian Fleming,” “Gabriel García Márquez,” “Václav Havel,” “Hergé,” “Stieg Larsson,” “Marcel Pagnol,” “Georges Simenon,” “Olga Tokarczuk,” and “Tolkien.”
In light of these precedents, INTA urged the GC to reverse the GBoA’s decision and confirm that personal names, including those of well-known individuals, can function as trademarks and retain their ability to indicate commercial origin, even when they achieve public recognition. INTA warned that a contrary outcome could undermine IP protection in the EU by potentially rendering all famous names ineligible for trademark registration.