Industrial Property Law

The collective mark and the guarantee mark, which are the subject of Articles L. 715-1 to L. 715-10 of the Intellectual Property Code, are both of a collective nature, which authorizes their use by any person complying with the rules of use established by their proprietor. They are distinguished from individual trademarks by their function: a guarantee trademark attests that the products or servic …

Collective and guarantee marks

The collective mark and the guarantee mark, which are the subject of Articles L. 715-1 to L. 715-10 of the Intellectual Property Code, are both of a collective nature, which authorizes their use by any person complying with the rules of use established by their proprietor. They are distinguished from individual trademarks by their function: a guarantee trademark attests that the products or services it covers have specific characteristics, while a collective trademark is intended to promote the interests of the members or adherents of the group that owns it.

Created by the Law of 31 December 1964, the collective mark could initially be registered by certain legal entities or groups for a purpose of general, industrial, commercial or agricultural interest, or to promote the development of the trade or industry of their members (Article 16). The filing of the application had to include the regulations determining the conditions to which its use is subject (Article 19). These provisions have led the Court of Cassation to exclude the protection of an individual trademark  or to declare its invalidity , when it was used in the manner of a collective trademark without having been properly registered. In the absence of a clearly defined legal demarcation between individual and collective trademarks, this case law was a source of legal uncertainty.

Law No 91-7 of 4 January 1991 subsequently clarified the rules governing collective marks by creating a distinction between simple collective marks and certification marks. The certification mark is intended to cover the product or service that presents, in terms of its nature, properties or qualities, the characteristics specified in its rules of use  . It must be capable of being used by any person who complies with its rules, the classification as a certification trademark being ruled out if the use of the trademark is subject to the conclusion of an accreditation agreement with its owner  . Because of its guarantee function, the certification mark is subject to specific provisions, particularly in terms of ownership, filing or transfer, whereas the collective mark follows the system applicable to individual marks. Specifically, the 1991 law did not make the collective mark subject to the obligation to file rules of use, so that the use of an individual mark as a simple collective mark no longer entailed its invalidity .

The Ordinance of 13 November 2019, which transposes Directive No 2015/2436, replaces the certification mark with the guarantee mark, without substantially amending its regime, and creates new provisions concerning collective marks. The new regime resulting from the transposition of the “Trademark Package” is subject to transitional measures. Under Article R. 718-7 of the Intellectual Property Code, simple collective marks and certification marks filed before the Decree of 9 December 2019 comes into force remain subject to the provisions of former Articles R. 715-1 and R. 715-2 of the Intellectual Property Code. During the one-year period from the entry into force of the decree, the proprietor of a collective certification mark or single mark may request that INPI enter the words “collective certification mark” or “single collective mark” in the national register of trademarks. The new rules relating to the trademark renewal procedure are immediately applicable to trademarks for which the one-year time-limit for submitting the renewal statement will have begun to run as of the entry into force of the Ordinance of 13 November 2019 .

Cass. com, 28 June 1976, LawLex202100006279JBJ7, which concerns service marks registered as individual marks but intended to be used by the proprietor's associates, i.e. operators of a driving school.

Cass. com. 29 June 1999, LawLex202200000981JBJ, relating to a trademark used by a group whose corporate purpose is to carry out or facilitate, on behalf of its members, transactions concerning products of which it is neither manufacturer nor trader; Cass. com, 30 January 2001, LawLex200200000670JBJ: does not constitute an undertaking in the manner of a collective mark the exploitation by an undertaking and a del credere commission agent for the storage, sale, physical distribution and invoicing of the products bearing these marks, which are not members of the cooperative union in question, which had the power to commercialize the products itself.

Law No 91-7 of 4 January 1991 on trademarks and service marks, Art. 30

Cass. com, 3 June 2008, LawLex200800000972JBJ.

Ordinance No. 2019-1169 of 13 November 2019, Art. 15, V.

Industrial Property Law

134. Collective and guarantee marks

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Sous parties

Les notions juridiques connexes

134. Collective and guarantee marks

Demandez un accès gratuit au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Sous parties

Les notions juridiques connexes

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise