"SPEICHERSTADT" as a registrable trade mark?

The Federal Patent Court had to decide whether the Hamburg district "SPEICHERSTADT" could be registered as a trade mark for a multitude of goods and services of various classes or whether "SPEICHERSTADT" lacked the requisite distinctive character.

The trade mark applicant filed the trade mark "SPEICHERSTADT" for a multitude of goods and services of various classes with the German Patent and Trade Mark Office. The Trade Mark Office rejected the registration on the grounds that the trade mark lacked the distinctive character necessary for registration.

Against this decision, the trade mark applicant filed an appeal (Rechtsbeschwerde) with the Federal Patent Court (Bundespatentgericht). The Hamburg Speicherstadt was not a geographical indication, since it was merely a warehouse complex. Furthermore, the goods and services applied for by the trade mark applicant were not typical of the Speicherstadt and were therefore not descriptive.

Court decision
The Federal Patent Court (Bundespatentgericht) confirmed the decision of the Trade Mark Office byorder of 04.05.2010 – Az.: 24 W (pat) 76/08It held that registration of the applied designation was precluded by the obstacles to protection consisting of lack of distinctive character and the goods and services-descriptive nature of the designation pursuant to § 8 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 Markengesetz.

The term "SPEICHERSTADT" would be associated by the public with the Hamburg Speicherstadt located at the harbour's edge, one of the largest and best-known sights of this city. Not only place names themselves but also designations of well-known districts could constitute unprotectable geographical designations. In this sense, "Speicherstadt" is also a geographical designation, even though there is no resident population living there.

In the multi-storey warehouses (storage facilities) of the Hamburg Speicherstadt, virtually all products, at every stage of processing, could be stored and traded. There was therefore a legitimate interest in unrestricted use of this designation. Given the fame of the Speicherstadt, it cannot be assumed that goods and services offered under the trade mark "SPEICHERSTADT" would be attributed by the relevant public to only a single undertaking. Thus the trade mark "Speicherstadt" lacked the requisite distinctive character.

Conclusion

In addition to place names, districts can also constitute unprotectable geographical designations. This must be examined on a case-by-case basis. In the case of less well-known districts, the decision could well be different.