Νομική βιβλιογραφία

Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, link Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Recitals Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Recitals Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Recitals, (1) Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 1 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 1 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 2 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 2 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 3 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 3 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 4 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 4 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 5 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 6 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 6 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 7 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 7 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 8 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 8 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 9 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 9 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 10 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 10 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 11 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 11 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 12 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 12 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 12

Οι επιρροές του δικαίου του αθέμιτου ανταγωνισμού στους περιορισμούς προστασίας του σήματος

The article dissects the evident interaction between trademark law and unfair competition law during the last few years. The writer lists some aspects of mutual influence between the two legal fields explaining that, in some instances, a trademark may be legitimately used by third parties in order for the free movement of goods and services to be attained, ensuring fair competition. According to l. 4679/2020, the name or address of a third party cannot be used as a trademark; the same applies for (a) signs or indications which are not distinctive and (b) the use of a trademark for the purpose of identifying or referring to goods or services as accessories or spare parts. However, using a sign in comparative advertising in a manner that is contrary to Directive 2006/114/EC is not an acceptable exception. As the writer points out, illegal comparative advertising is also an act of unfair competition. The separate treatment of the comparative advertising practice results from the fact that Directive 2006/114 comes with its distinct list of conditions of permissibility. Consequently, according to the writer, application of Article 11 of l. 4679/2020 regarding comparative advertising is neither appropriate nor coherent implementation of Union law.