BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> SEO, SE,O SITE BUILDER, SE,O TOURISM SITE BUILDER, SE,O PROPERTY SITE BUILDER, SE,O AUTOMOTIVE SITE BUILDER (series of five trade marks) (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2008] UKIntelP o28108 (14 October 2008)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2008/o28108.html
Cite as: [2008] UKIntelP o28108

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


SEO, SE,O SITE BUILDER, SE,O TOURISM SITE BUILDER, SE,O PROPERTY SITE BUILDER, SE,O AUTOMOTIVE SITE BUILDER (series of five trade marks) (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2008] UKIntelP o28108 (14 October 2008)

For the whole decision click here: o28108

Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/281/08
Decision date
14 October 2008
Hearing officer
Mr M Foley
Mark
SEO, SE,O SITE BUILDER, SE,O TOURISM SITE BUILDER, SE,O PROPERTY SITE BUILDER, SE,O AUTOMOTIVE SITE BUILDER (series of five trade marks)
Classes
09, 16, 41, 42
Applicants
IT3 Internet Application Solutions Limited
Opponents
Babylon Technologies Ltd
Opposition
Sections 3(1)(a); 3(1)(b); 3(1)(c); 3(1)(d) (Reference is made in the decision of a ground under Section 5(4)(a), which was withdrawn and the Section 3(1)(a) objection was not pursued)

Result

Opposition Sections 3(1)(b) & 3(1)(c); successful, for the most part.

Points Of Interest

Summary

The opposition was based on the fact (generally accepted) that the acronym SEO meant Search Engine Optimisation; the remainder of each marked being purely descriptive.

The Hearing Officer found that the additional element in the marks means that they were not ‘exclusively composed ….” and the Section 3(1)(d) objection was dismissed accordingly.

However, the Sections 3(1)(b) & 3(1)(c) objections were upheld since “search engine optimisation” was specified in all the goods and services in the application, save for “Stationery, wall charts; diaries, notebooks and writing implements” in Class 16. The registration was permitted to proceed in respect of these goods only.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2008/o28108.html