From Brand Performance to Consumer Performativity: Assessing European Trade Mark Law after the Rise of Anthropological Marketing

Since the 2009 CJEU decision in L'Oréal v. Bellure, the idea that a brand's image is the property of the trade mark owner has become increasingly entrenched within European trade mark law. Brand image is now protected even where there is no harm to the underlying mark. However, the courts have largely failed to acknowledge the radical ways in which the marketplace for goods bearing trade marks has changed in the past three decades. One key shift is that businesses and marketers no longer view the brand creation process from a top‐down ‘brand performance’ perspective, but, rather, through the prisms of ‘anthropological marketing’ and ‘consumer performativity'. Through an interdisciplinary approach, this article dissects the process of brand creation in the context of European trade mark law, and argues that the law must take account of consumer agency when the question of who should own brand image arises.     

Just Cognition: Scientific Research on Bias and Some Implications for Legal Procedure and Decision‐Making

Common law judges have traditionally been concerned about bias and the appearance of bias. Bias is believed to threaten the administration of justice and the legitimacy of legal decision‐making, particularly public confidence in the courts. This article contrasts legal approaches to bias with a range of biases, particularly cognitive biases, familiar to scientists who study human cognition and decision‐making. Research reveals that judges have narrowly conceived the biases that threaten legal decision‐making, insisting that some potential sources of bias are not open to review and that they are peculiarly resistant to bias through legal training and judicial experience. This article explains how, notwithstanding express concern with bias, there has been limited legal engagement with many risks known to actually bias decision‐making. Through examples, and drawing upon scientific research, it questions legal approaches and discusses the implications of more empirically‐based approaches to bias for decision making and institutional legitimacy.     

Strong trade marks and the likelihood of confusion in European law

Legal context. One of the fundamental assumptions of trade marklaw is that provision should be made to prevent the registrationor commercial exploitation of trade marks that are likely tobe confused with earlier marks. The justification for this assumptionis however unclear. Is it to protect the expectation of itsowner that a trade mark will provide a comfort zone, an areawithin which other traders simply may not enter? Is it to encourageinvestment in the development of a relationship between thetrade mark owner and his prospective customers by offering interference-freemarketing opportunities? Is it to protect the efficiency ofthe market by facilitating the making of decisions by consumersas to which product or process they wish to purchase? Or isit to protect the vulnerable consumer against the personal consequencesof his inattention or inability to discern the differences betweenproducts or services? Key points. This article examines the development of Europeanlaw relating to the protection of strong trade marks, thosewhich are highly distinctive or well known, against similarmarks that may or may not be likely to cause consumer confusion.It demonstrates the manner in which the European Court of Justiceseeks to address the likelihood of confusion in terms whichappear to draw more from legal abstractions than from marketrealities. After giving a favourable review of the controversialdecision of that court in the PICARO/PICASSO case, the articlelists further issues which European trade mark litigation hasso far failed to address. Practical significance. Armed with an understanding of the principlesemployed by the European Court of Justice, trade mark proprietorsin Europe will obtain a better appreciation of the strategiesto be used in either challenging competitors' marks in courtor adopting commercial measures to combat them.     

Beyond Rational Choice: the Hot/Cool Perspective of Criminal Decision Making

This paper proposes a general framework of criminal decision making that assumes both ‘cool’ cognition and ‘hot’ affect, i.e. feelings, to influence criminal choice. Drawing from judgment and decision making research and social psychology, the hot/cool perspective extends rational choice and deterrence theories by explaining how affect is likely to influence criminal decisions alongside cognitive considerations, such as the perceived costs and benefits of crime. It is shown how the hot/cool perspective offers a more realistic account of criminal decision making processes than existing decision models and approaches and also allows for the explanation of criminal behaviors that are difficult to explain in terms of rational choice.     

Trade marks plus? the role of trade marks in the global economy and the danger of over-protection

This article examines the economic role of the trade mark, both as a structuring device and as a means of adding value to products. It shows how its role as a flexible structuring device that provides a distinct focus for goodwill derives from the special meaning of the term “origin” or “trade origin” in trade mark law, this being what a trade mark is supposed to indicate. Firms can control the identity that a trade mark signifies and confers on the products with which it is used without being tied to any particular set of production arrangements. This article also considers how goodwill can be a source of economic benefit both through reducing transaction costs and, in some cases, through adding value to products. This article then examines the economic rationale for the legal protection of trade marks and shows how this is analogous to the rationale for awarding property rights over tangible resources and different from that for other forms of intellectual property right. The pressure to expand the legal protection of stronger trade marks is explored and it is accepted that there is an economic case for doing so. However, it is argued that the additional protection must be carefully calibrated through definitions that take account of its economic rationale and avoid the danger of over-extending it. In particular, this danger of over-protection arises from making a false analogy between stronger trade marks and the kind of intangible output that is the subject of the other forms of intellectual property right.     

Free Trade: What is it Good For? Globalization,Deregulation, and ‘Public Opinion’

Deliberation is an essential element in legitimate and sound decision making. The deliberative ideal has much resonance with ideas of ‘localization’, employing the value of local and applied knowledge. Participation is also of particular value under globalization. We argue that the capacity of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to absorb and reflect participatory aspects of decision making is crucial to its future legitimacy and status. Should the WTO be seen as one of the darker forces of globalization? Or as an emerging institution of global accountability? The latter depends upon recognition that the potential deregulatory effect of the WTO is contingent, and that the liberalization of international trade should enhance welfare, rather than be a goal in its own right. Deliberative solutions require a strong public sphere, and we therefore consider whether solutions based on ‘empowered consumer choice’, rather than public deliberation, are unsatisfactory responses to the deregulatory impact of international trade disputes and their outcomes.     

Comparative advertising and trade mark infringement: some guidance from the Netherlands

A recent decision of one of the five Dutch Appeal Courts hasclarified the relationship between trade mark law and advertisinglaw, holding that a trade mark owner cannot successfully accumulatetrade mark and advertising claims: where publicity complieswith the standards of advertising law, such use cannot thusamount to trade mark infringement.     

This Time,it's for Real: The Health and Social Care Act 2012

This article examines the Health and Social Care Act 2012 and associated reforms to the National Health Service in England. It focuses on the Act's policy of making the NHS market more ‘real’, by both encouraging and compelling NHS bodies to act as ‘market players’. The article considers whether the reforms are compatible with the constitutional requirements of accountability for the provision of a public service such as the NHS. It argues that the reforms threaten accountability for three reasons: they make the Secretary of State for Health's relationship with the NHS more complex, they create opaque networks of non‐statutory bodies which may influence NHS decision‐making, and (especially in relation to competition) they ‘juridify’ policy choices as matters of law. Taken together, these arguments suggest that there is force in the claim that the reforms will contribute to ‘creeping’ – and thus unaccountable – privatisation of the NHS.     

The new consumer and business protection regulations: another string to the brand owner's bow?

Legal context: This article assesses the impact of The Consumer Protectionfrom Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs) (implementing theUnfair Commercial Practices Directive) and The Business. Protectionfrom Misleading Marketing Regulations 2008 (BPRs) (implementingthe consolidated and codified Misleading and Comparative AdvertisingDirective) on areas of marketing and advertising in which IPrights often become involved and the impact of the recent ECJdecisionon their application in the O2 v Hutchison 3G referencebythe Court of Appeal. Key points: The CPRs govern advertising and promotional activities aimedat consumers. Much of the consumer and business protection legislationpreviously scattered amongst various Acts has been repealedand replaced by elements of the BPRs or CPRs. In total, 36 Regulationsand Orders and 41 Acts are affected. The BPRs now govern misleadingmarketing and comparative advertising, previously dealt withunder the Control of Misleading Advertising Regulations 1988.The article looks at how these Regulations may be applied insituations which interested parties currently attempt to resolveusing trade mark or passing off laws. Practical significance: The new Regulations are aimed at the protection of consumersand businesses from unscrupulous marketing and trade promotionpractices which affect their economic behaviour. Thirty-onepractices are specifically identified as automatically fallingfoul of the Regulations. Businesses will need to review theirpractices to avoid the possibility of criminal penalties includingfines and imprisonment for consenting, conniving, or recklessofficers of businesses involved in such practices. Until the ECJ decision in O2 v Hutchison 3G, it had been thought(from Jacob LJ's finding in his reference to the ECJ in thiscase) that trade mark law had no role to play in comparativeadvertising as it was specifically provided for under the ComparativeAdvertising Directive and hence under the BPRs. Since thesedid not provide an individual right of action (the OFT or TradingStandards alone may enforce), it left trade mark owners withlittle muscle in comparative advertising situations. However,the ECJ made clear that where practices fail to satisfy thecriteria set out in the Directive for legitimate comparativeadvertising, trade mark law may be invoked as a remedy. Thiswill be a relief to major brand owners for whom comparativeadvertising is commonly a concern.     

The Quiet‐Loud‐Quiet Politics of Post‐Crisis Consumer Bankruptcy Law: The Case of Ireland and the Troika

A decade after the Global Financial Crisis, many developed economies continue to strain under excessive household debt. This article presents evidence suggesting that the failure of policymakers to enact debt relief measures may lie in the superior influence of the coordinated and concentrated financial sector over legislative processes, as compared to the diffuse and disorganised interests of consumer debtors. Post‐crisis popular interest in technical issues of personal insolvency law created only a narrow space of political opportunity. Soon these questions returned to the domain of technocratic actors and corporate influence. The article examines this situation through an inter‐disciplinary case study of consumer bankruptcy reform in Ireland under ‘Troika’ supervision. Proposals initially billed as assisting over‐indebted households developed into increasingly creditor‐friendly legislation in ‘quieter’ stages of technocratic decision‐making. The stark implications of these findings highlight obstacles to resolving household debt problems and consequent risks of economic and political instability.     

Shadow Writing and Participant Observation: A Study of Criminal Justice Social Work Around Sentencing

The study of decision‐making by public officials in administrative settings has been a mainstay of law and society scholarship for decades. The methodological challenges posed by this research agenda are well understood: how can socio‐legal researchers get inside the heads of legal decision‐makers in order to understand the uses of official discretion? This article describes an ethnographic technique the authors developed to help them penetrate the decision‐making practices of criminal justice social workers in writing pre‐sentence reports for the courts. This technique, called ‘shadow writing’, involved a particular form of participant observation whereby the researcher mimicked the process of report writing in parallel with the social workers. By comparing these ‘shadow reports’ with the real reports in a training‐like setting, the social workers revealed in detail the subtleties of their communicative strategies embedded in particular reports and their sensibilities about report writing more generally.     

Judging a Judge: A Reappraisal of Lord Mansfield and Somerset’s Case

This article presents an occasion on which moral judgement can, and should, take place. When the chief justice of the court of king’s bench – William Murray, first earl of Mansfield – was presented with the case of Somerset v Stewart in 1772, he was presented with choices that unveiled aspects of his character. By first establishing the ambiguity of the legal context and the multifarious political pressures that preceded Somerset’s case, this article identifies the extent of Lord Mansfield’s ‘room for manoeuvre’ with respect to three elements of his conduct: the delay and reluctance in making a decision, the choices regarding the substantive decision and the manner of expressing that decision. To what extent did Mansfield have freedom of action, and how did he exercise it? Are those free actions worthy of praise or condemnation? Through an essential questioning of previous historians’ assumptions and omissions, this article sharpens the strokes through which a complex portrait of Mansfield may be rendered.     

Knocking on the Door: Juvenile and Family Courts as a Forum for Facilitating School Attendance and Decreasing Truancy

While there is debate about whether courts should be involved in truancy reduction efforts, less recognized is how courts can impact school attendance without lengthening their reach or further penalizing children and families. Courts are already involved with school‐related decision making in child welfare and delinquency cases. This article reports on data from a qualitative study of stakeholder perspectives (N = 64) on school attendance in Maryland. Respondents suggested that courts adopt engagement‐focused approaches to guide their work such as family assessments, school attendance plans, monitoring coordination and delivery of services, and ensuring that agencies meet their obligations to children.     

Dishonestly and without due cause

Legal context: UK trade mark law was harmonised with the laws of other EU memberstates pursuant to the Trade Marks Directive (89/104/EEC) withthe coming into force of the Trade Marks Act 1994. Since then,the English courts have sought to absorb into English jurisprudencecontinental concepts of unfair competition, and a new code relatingto the use of another's trade mark in comparative advertising.Traditionally, the English approach has been more liberal andless protective of a trade mark owner's rights than that ofcontinental jurisdictions, but since 1994 the ECJ has been calledupon to provide frequent guidance on the interpretation of expressionssuch as the "essential function" of a trade mark and the "dutyto act fairly" in relation to the legitimate interests of thetrade mark proprietor. Key points: This article examines the way in which some recent decisionsof the ECJ have led to the English courts having greater regardto the property interests of the trade mark owner and less regardto the concepts of free market competition and consumer protection.In the recent High Court case of L'Oréal and others vBellure NV and others, Lewison J made findings of infringementunder s.10(1) and (3) Trade Marks Act 1994 where he found thatthere was "free riding" on the back of the reputation of certainof L'Oreal's trade marks without there being any evidence ofconfusion or association between the trade marks and the defendants'signs. Practical significance: For trade mark owners, this change in the approach of the Englishcourts opens up new opportunities to combat look-alike productsand comparative advertisements which take unfair advantage ofthe reputation of established marks.     

Article 81 is a defence to a plea of trade mark infringement

The Court of Appeal in Sportswear considered the interactionbetween the EU principle of free movement of goods and respectfor trade marks rights. In overturning the decision of Mr JusticeWarren to strike out an Article 81 defence to trade mark infringement,the court found that there was a sufficient nexus between theArticle 81 defence and the trade mark infringement claim.     

Potential Impact of Research on Adolescent Development on Juvenile Judge Decision‐making

This paper discusses how biological and psychological literature on the developmental differences between juveniles and adults may affect juvenile judges in their “dual role” as retributive and rehabilitative decision‐makers in juvenile cases, specifically focusing on sentencing. Particularly, it discusses potential influences of this research on adolescent development regarding four factors known to be integral in juvenile judge decision‐making: legal factors, characteristics of juvenile offenders, and individual structural and social contexts in which judges’ decisions are made. To conclude, implications and recommendations stemming from this discussion are considered.     

欧洲民法典草案消费者撤回权制度研究

基于保护消费者免于遭受侵略性商业行为、去除跨境、在线交易障碍,以及保护复杂合同下处于信息弱势之消费者之目的,欧洲民法典草案明确规定了消费者撤回权制度,并对消费者撤回权概念、适用范围、行使方式、期限、告知义务及效果等作了规定。民法典中规定消费者撤回权,体现了民法理念从形式正义到实质正义,民法主体从抽象人格到具体人格、从强而智到弱而愚者的转变。欧洲民法典草案撤回权制度对我国相关制度的完善具有重大借鉴意义。     

'Trade mark use' in Europe: revisiting Arsenal in the light of Opel and Picasso

Legal context: The European Court of Justice (ECJ) decision in the case ofArsenal Football Club v. Reed led to uncertainty regarding thepractical scope of a trade mark proprietor's property rights. Key points: The uncertainty resulted from a failure of the ECJ to addressclearly the issue of what constitutes infringing trade markuse. The ECJ ignored the question of the High Court as to whetheruse of a trade mark as an indication of origin is necessaryfor establishing infringement. They instead established an ambiguousstandard for what constitutes infringing trade mark use, suggestingthat only use that jeopardises the essential function of a trademark is an infringing use. This ambiguity has had problematicimplications for subsequent interpretations of trade mark law,particularly in the Court of Appeal in Arsenal and the Houseof Lords in R v Johnstone. Two relatively new ECJ cases may help clarify the issue. InOPEL, the ECJ suggested that infringing use of a trade markmust be use that is perceived by the relevant public as a designationof origin. The Picasso decision limits the effect of the Arsenaldecision on the relevance of confusion in non-sale situationsto the facts of Arsenal. In particular, it stresses the pointthat when assessing likelihood of confusion in the context ofan opposition to an application for registration the court shouldfocus on the perception of the relevant public at the pointof sale. Practical significance: The benefit of these two cases is that they create some clarityfor legal practitioners and the Courts when addressing the questionof what constitutes infringing trade mark use.     

“枪手代笔”的著作权问题与消费者利益保护

"枪手代笔"行为是否合法,关键看署名权的转移是否合法。实践中,当事方通常借助三种途径实现署名方式的转移:转让著作权、委托创作作品中的约定和署名权的行使。围绕着这三种行为的合法性,存在两种不同的观点:意思自治视角坚持可自由转移的立场,公共利益视角则反对这种转移。实际上,意思自治原则与公共利益理念结合起来才能够客观评判"枪手代笔"的合法性。更为重要的是,文化消费者的利益应该受到重视。署名权的转让、约定和行使,影响到文化消费者的知情权、选择权和公平交易权。为保障文化消费者的利益,建议著作权法规范署名方式,打击有损公共利益和消费者利益的"枪手代笔"行为。