11.08.2012 Views

AVIS DE DROIT PROTECTION DES SIGNES NATIONAUX

AVIS DE DROIT PROTECTION DES SIGNES NATIONAUX

AVIS DE DROIT PROTECTION DES SIGNES NATIONAUX

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

ETATS-UNIS<br />

On a narrower note, federal law also prohibits the use of the flag within the District of<br />

Columbia for commercial purposes, such as advertising or as a feature of a commercial<br />

product. 340 Although the improper use of the national flag outside the District of Columbia<br />

has not been made a federal offense, should Congress wish to assume such control, it has the<br />

power under the Constitution to do so. 341 The vast majority of states have enacted such<br />

statutes 342 .<br />

The determination of whether a proposed mark consists of or comprises a flag, coat of arms or<br />

other insignia must be made "without a careful analysis and side-by-side comparison." The<br />

public should be considered to retain only a general or overall, rather than specific,<br />

recollection of the various elements or characteristics of design marks. 343<br />

"Simulation," as contemplated by §2(b), refers to "something that gives the appearance or<br />

effect or has the characteristics of an original item." 344 Whether a mark comprises a<br />

simulation must be determined from a visual comparison of the mark vis-à-vis replicas of the<br />

flag, coat of arms or other insignia in question. 345 The incorporation in a mark of individual or<br />

distorted features that are merely suggestive of flags, coats of arms or other insignia does not,<br />

however, bar registration under §2(b). 346<br />

The Trademark Act distinguishes between flags, coats of arms and insignias, on the one<br />

hand, and other national symbols, on the other. As noted in Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.,<br />

185 F. Supp. at 908, 127 USPQ at 323:<br />

340<br />

4 U.S.C. § 3 available at: http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html#5 .<br />

341<br />

34 Op.Atty.Gen. 483 (1925).<br />

342<br />

See §2c “droit regional” infra.<br />

343<br />

In re Advance Industrial Security, Inc., 194 USPQ 344, 346 (TTAB 1977) (ADVANCE SECURITY<br />

and design consisting of an eagle on a triangular shield, in gold and brown, for detective and<br />

investigative services and providing security systems and services, found registrable, the Board<br />

stating, "When the mark of the applicant and the Coat of Arms or Great Seal of the United States are<br />

compared in their entireties, it is adjudged that applicant's mark does not consist of or comprise the<br />

Coat of Arms of the United States or any simulation thereof ....").<br />

344<br />

In re Waltham Watch Co., 179 USPQ 59, 60 (TTAB 1973) (mark consisting of wording and the<br />

design of a globe and six flags for watches found registrable, the Board stating, "[A]lthough the flags<br />

depicted in applicant's mark incorporate common elements of flag designs such as horizontal or<br />

vertical lines, crosses or stars, they are readily distinguishable from any of the flags of the nations<br />

alluded to by the examiner. In fact, applicant's mark would be regarded as nothing more than a<br />

conglomeration of nondescript flags utilized to symbolize the significance of the globe design and the<br />

slogan 'TIMING THE WORLD' appearing thereon.")<br />

345<br />

Id.<br />

346<br />

See Knorr-Nahrmittel A.G. v. Havland International, Inc., 206 USPQ 827, 833 (TTAB 1980) (While<br />

applicant originally may have intended to include the flags of the Scandinavian countries in the mark,<br />

NOR-KING and design, "[a]ll that the record reflects is that the mark contains a representation of<br />

certain flags, but not the flag or flags of any particular nation." Opposer's cause of action under §2(b)<br />

found to be without merit; opposition sustained on other grounds); In re National Van Lines, Inc., 123<br />

USPQ 510 (TTAB 1959) (mark comprising words and the design of a shield with vertical stripes held<br />

registrable, the Board finding the design to be readily distinguishable from the shield of the Great<br />

Seal of the United States and, therefore, not a simulation of the seal or any portion thereof); In re<br />

American Box Board Co., 123 USPQ 508 (TTAB 1959) (design mark comprising an eagle and shield<br />

held registrable, the Board finding that it did not involve a simulation of the Great Seal of the United<br />

States because the eagle and shield of applicant's mark differed substantially from those on the seal in<br />

both appearance and manner of display).<br />

208

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!