Advocate General opines on extent of ‘use’ of trade marks by online intermediaries (Louboutin v Amazon)

Table of contents

• What are the practical implications of this case?
• What was the background?
• What did the AG opine?
• Case details

Article summary

IP analysis: The Advocate General (AG) has given an opinion in relation to requests for a preliminary ruling in the context of a dispute between the Amazon group and Christian Louboutin. Louboutin alleged direct liability for trade mark infringement on the basis that, by displaying advertisements for red-soled shoes relating to goods which had been placed on the market without his consent, Amazon had used a sign that was identical to his trade marks for goods or services which were identical to those for which the trade marks were registered, and, in particular, that the advertisements at issue formed an integral part of Amazon’s commercial communication. However, the AG opined that the specific features of Amazon’s business practices did not support the finding that a sign had been ‘used’ by Amazon within the meaning of EU law.