Versaille mark registered in strange decision

The Chamber of Patent Disputes recently examined a conflict involving a Russian food product and a French name. The conflict was over a trade mark application for the designation Версаль (a well-known Russian translation of the word Versaille) in the name of a Siberian dairy producer in the city of Irkutsk in respect of goods in class 30 («dressings including mayonnaise»). The applicant for the trade mark is one of the leading producers of dairy products in Russia including mayonnaise under the name of Версаль (Versaille) the production of which started in 2003.

The examiner rejected the application because the word element Versaille in Cyrillic is the name of a town in France and this designation would mislead the customer with regard to the location of the producer of the goods.

Surprisingly, the Chamber of Patent Disputes did not support the opinion of the examiner and took a decision to register the trade mark. Its argument ran that Versailles is a suburb of south-west Paris, which became famous because it has outstanding historical architectural monuments and pieces of art and it was marked by important historical events which took place there.

Before the French Revolution, from 1666 to 1789 Versaille was the official royal residence. It acquired the status of a museum as far back as 1801 and was open to the public. The whole architectural complex of Versaille became a museum in 1830. The museum of history of France was opened in the royal palace in 1837. Specifically, the Versaille palace and the park adjoining it were included in the list of Unesco World Heritage sites in 1979. (Parc et château de Versailles and not the designation Версаль).

According to the Chamber of Patent Disputes these considerations justify the conclusion that the word element Версаль of the claimed designation is famous for its historic and architectural places of interest and is not related to the production of goods, particularly mayonnaise.

Further, the Chamber of Patent Disputes argued that this designation is a coined phrase in relation to the claimed goods, so it does not warrant its attribution as capable of misleading the consumer with regard to the place of manufacture of goods.

Strange logic! If one follows it to its natural conclusion, one could register the trade mark Eiffel Tower for a plant rolling out steel structures somewhere in Russia.