In this article, Geerts elaborates further on his opinion that slavishly copying products, which causes confusion, falls within the scope of the UCP Directive.
Confusing slavish imitation aimed at consumers is considered to be a commercial practice within the meaning of the UCP rules. It is hard to say whether this should also be considered as unfair. UCP rules do not label slavish imitation as an unfair commercial practice; they rather relate to accompanying circumstances (the "marketing messages"). Geerts mentions that the appearance of the product itself could be considered as "marketing message". In short, his conclusion is that UCP rules provide for possibilities to challenge slavishly imitation.