The Concepts of Trademark Exhaustion and Parallel Imports: A Comparative Analysis between the EU and the USA

Dobrin, Samuel; Chochia, Archil

doi:10.1515/bjes-2016-0011

Abstract

The article intends to analyze the closely correlated concepts of trademark exhaustion and parallel imports. The growing importance of these concepts in the current world, especially in the European Union, makes it an interesting research topic, even though the concepts are complicated due to their nature and different actors involved. The authors use comparative approach, concentrating on two world leaders in the field, in order to discover what is the approach of the EU as well as the approach of the USA to the concepts of trademark exhaustion and parallel imports, what are the benefits and weaknesses of these approaches, and analyze why these markets have arrived at certain conclusions.

References

Abbott, F. M.; Cottier, T. & Gurry, F. (2011), International Intellectual Property in an Integrated World Economy, 2nd ed., New York: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Altman, L. & Pollack, M. (2015), Callmann on Unfair Competition, Trademarks and Monopolies, 4th ed., Database updated December 2015 (Available on Westlaw).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Apollinaris Co. Ltd. v. Scherer [1886], District Court of New York, Second Circuit, 27 F. (1886) 18.10.2307/196787
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Avgoustis, I. (2012), ‘Parallel imports and exhaustion of trade mark rights: should steps be taken towards an international exhaustion regime?’ European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 108-121.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bently, L. & Sherman, B. (2009), Intellectual Property Law, 3rd ed., New York: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Birstonas, R. & Klimkeviciute, D. (2014), ‘Problematic aspects of the application of the principle of exhaustion of trademark rights in the EU (EEA) and of its interrelation with contract law: possible solutions?’ European Scientific Journal, vol. 10, no. 19, pp. 72-100.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bonadio, E. (2011), ‘Parallel imports in a global market: should a generalised international exhaustion be the next step?’ European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 153-161.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Calboli, I. (2002), ‘Trademark exhaustion in the European Union: Community-wide or international? The saga continues,’ Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review, vol. 6, pp. 47-90.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
— (2011), ‘Market integration and (the limits of) the first sale rule in North American and European trademark law,’ Santa Clara Law Review, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 1241-1282.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
— (2012), ‘Reviewing the (shrinking) principle of trademark exhaustion in the European Union (ten years later),’ Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review, vol. 16, pp. 258-281.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Centrafarm v. Winthrop [1974], Centrafarm BV and Adriaan de Peijper v. Winthrop BV, CJEU 31.10.1974, Case 16/74.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Chen, H.-L. (2009), ‘Gray marketing: does it hurt the manufacturers?’ The Atlantic Economic Journal, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 27-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11293-008-9154-610.1007/s11293-008-9154-6
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cheng, F.-C. (2012), ‘Gaining experience from a case analysis of the parallel importation of trademark goods in the United States,’ NTUT Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Management, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 175-188.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Current as of 8 June 2015.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cook, T. (2010), EU Intellectual Property Law, New York: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cornish, W. R.; Llewelyn, D. & Aplin, T. (2010), Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights, 7th ed., London: Sweet & Maxwell Limited.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Craig, P. & Búrca, G. D. (2015), EU Law: Text, Cases, and Materials, 6th ed., New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198714927.001.000110.1093/he/9780198714927.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Davidoff [2001], Zino Davidoff SA v. A & G Imports Ltd and Levi Strauss & Co. and Others v. Tesco Stores Ltd and Others, CJEU 20.11.2001, Joined cases C-414/99 to C-416/99.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
EC (1988), First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (First TM Directive).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
— (1999), Exhaustion of Trade Mark Rights: Working Document from the Commission Services, Commission Working Paper on Trademark Exhaustion, Internal Market Council, 21 June 1999, pp. 15-16. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/docs/tm/exhaust_en.pdf [accessed 2 Aug 2016]
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
— (2008), Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (EU TM Directive).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
— (2015), Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (New EU TM Directive).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
EFTA (n.d.), Information about the EEA. Retrieved from www.efta.int/eea/eeaagreement/eea-basic-features [accessed 5 Jul 2016] EMI v. CBS [1976],
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
EMI Records Limited v. CBS United Kingdom Limited, CJEU 15.6.1976, Case 51/75.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Farley, C. H. (2014), ‘Territorial exclusivity in U.S. copyright and trademark law,’ in P.-E. Moyse (ed.) Distribution des Intangibles - La Propriété Intellectuelle dans le Commerce des Nouveaux Biens, Montreal: Éditions Thémis, pp. 45-66.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Griffiths, A. (2011), An Economic Perspective on Trade Mark Law, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/978085793647910.4337/9780857936479
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Grigoriadis, L. G. (2014), Trade Marks and Free Trade: A Global Analysis, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04795-910.1007/978-3-319-04795-9
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
INTA (2015), International Trademark Association Position Paper on Parallel Imports, Parallel Imports Committee, August 2015. Retrieved from www.inta.org/Advocacy/Documents/2015/INTA_PIC_Position_Paper.pdf [accessed 2 Aug 2016]
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jehoram, H. C. (1999), ‘Prohibition of parallel imports through intellectual property rights,’ International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 495-511.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jehoram, T. C.; Nispen, C. & Huydecoper, T. (2010), European Trademark Law: Community Trademark Law and Harmonized National Trademark Law, The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
K-Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc. [1988], Supreme Court of the United States, 486 US (1988) 281.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Katz, A. (2016, forthcoming), ‘The economic rationale of exhaustion: distribution and post-sale restraints (21 August 2015),’ in I. Caboli & E. Lee (eds.) Research Handbook on IP Exhaustion and Parallel Imports, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.10.4337/9781783478712.00009
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Katzel [1923], A. Bourjois & Co. Inc. v. Katzel, Supreme Court of the United States, 260 US (1923) 689.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Keeling, D.; Llewelyn, D.; Mellor, J.; Moody-Stuart, T. & Berkeley, I. (2014), Kerly’s Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names, 15th ed., London: Sweet & Maxwell. (Electronic version available on Westlaw).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kerikmäe, T. & Dutt, P. K. (2014), ‘Conceptualization of emerging legal framework of e-regulation in the European Union,’ In T. Kerikmae (ed.) Regulating eTechnologies in the European Union: Normative Realities and Trends, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, pp. 7-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08117-5_210.1007/978-3-319-08117-5_2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. [2013], Supreme Court of the United States, 133 S. Ct. (2013) 1351.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
LaFrance, M. (2009), Understanding Trademark Law, 2nd ed., New Providence, NJ & San Francisco, CA: LexisNexis.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
— (2013), ‘Wag the dog: using incidental intellectual property rights to block parallel imports,’ Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 45-120.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lever Brothers Company v. United States [1993], United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, 981 F.2d (1993) 1330.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Li, C. & Maskus, K. E. (2006), ‘The impact of parallel imports on investments in costreducing research and development,’ Journal of International Economics, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 443-455. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2005.07.00610.1016/j.jinteco.2005.07.006
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
MacGillivray, R. A. (2010), Parallel Importation, Canada: Canada Law Book.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Martin’s Herend Imports, Inc v. Diamond & Gem Trading USA [1997], United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 112 F.3d (1997) 1296.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Maskus, K. E. (2000), ‘Parallel imports,’ The World Economy, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 1269-1284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9701.0032910.1111/1467-9701.00329
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
— (2010), ‘The curious economics of parallel imports,’ WIPO Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 123-132.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
McCarthy, J. T. (2016), McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition, 4th ed., March 2016 Update (Available on Westlaw).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Michaels, A. & Norris, A. (2010), A Practical Approach to Trade Mark Law, 4th ed., New York: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mueller-Langer, F. (2012), ‘Parallel trade and its ambiguous effects on global welfare,’ Review of International Economics, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 177-185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9396.2011.01016.x10.1111/j.1467-9396.2011.01016.x
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
NERA (1999), The Economic Consequences of the Choice of a Regime of Exhaustion in the Area of Trademarks. Final Report for DGXV of the European Commission, Prepared by the National Economic Research Associates (NERA), SJ Berwin & Co and IFF Research London, 8 February 1999. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/docs/tm/report_en.pdf [2 Aug 2016]
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Norman, H. E. (2013), Intellectual Property Law: Directions, New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/he/9780199688104.001.0001
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nyman-Metcalf, N.; Dutt, P. K. & Chochia, A. (2014), ’The freedom to conduct business and the right to property: the EU technology transfer block exemption regulation and the relationship between intellectual property and competition law,’ in T. Kerikmae (ed.) Protecting Human Rights in the EU, Berlin: Springer-Verlag pp. 37-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38902-3_410.1007/978-3-642-38902-3_4
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ohly, A. & Pila, J. (2013), The Europeanization of Intellectual Property Law: Towards a European Legal Methodology, New York: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Peatman, S. (2014), ‘Moving toward uniform international trademark protection: how amending the TRIPS Agreement will make parallel importing of gray goods less gray,’ Southwestern Journal of International Law, vol. 20, pp. 445-465.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Phytheron International SA v. Jean Bourdon SA [1997], CJEU 20.3.1997, Case C-352/95.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Prutzman, L. D. & Stenshoel, E. (2013), ‘IP Exhaustion around the World: Differing Approaches and Consequences to the Reach of IP Protection beyond the First Sale - The Exhaustion Doctrine in the United States.’ New York State Bar Association. International Law and Practice Section. Hanoi, Vietnam, Fall Meeting 2013. Retrieved from www.nysba.org/Sections/International/Seasonal_Meetings/Vietnam/Program_3/Eric_Stenshoel_and_L__Donald_Prutzman_materials.html [accessed 2 Aug 2016]
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rai, R. K. & Jagannathan, S. (2012), ‘Parallel imports and unparallel laws: an examination of the exhaustion doctrine through the lens of pharmaceutical products,’ Information & Communications Technology Law, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 53-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2012.64469210.1080/13600834.2012.644692
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ralf Sieckmann v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt [2002], CJEU 12.12.2002, C-273/00.10.1109/LMWC.2002.1016821
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sardina, M. V. (2011), ‘Exhaustion and first sale in intellectual property,’ Santa Clara Law Review, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 1055-1062.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sebago [1999], Sebago Inc. and Ancienne Maison Dubois & Fils SA v. G-B Unic SA, CJEU 1.7.1999, Case C-173/98.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Shen, C. (2012), ‘Intellectual property rights and international free trade: new jurisprudence of international exhaustion doctrine under the traditional legal system,’ Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 176-211.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Silhouette [1998], Silhouette International Schmied GmbH & Co. KG v. Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH, CJEU 16.7.1998, Case C-355/96.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
The United States Code (U.S. Code), Office of the Law Revision Counsel, The United States Code Online is current through Public Law 114-115 (28 December 2015), except for 114-195.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
The United States Trademark Act of 1946, as Amended 25 November 2013.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Treaty on European Union (TEU), Consolidated version of the 26 October 2012, Official Journal of the European Union, C 326/01.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Consolidated version of the 26 October 2012, Official Journal of the European Union, C 326/01.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Verma, S. K. (1998), ‘Exhaustion of intellectual property rights and free trade - Article 6 of the TRIPS Agreement,’ International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 534-567.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Vrins, O. & Schneider, M., eds. (2012), Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Through Border Measures: Law and Practice in the EU, 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zappalaglio, A. (2015), ‘International exhaustion of trade marks and parallel imports in the US and the EU: how to achieve symmetry?’ Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 68-86.10.4337/qmjip.2015.05.04
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zino Davidoff SA v. CVS Corporation [2009], United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, 571 F.3d (2009) 238.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

The Concepts of Trademark Exhaustion and Parallel Imports: A Comparative Analysis between the EU and the USA

Abstract

Paradigm

My account