Blu-Ray Disc Association
Case
•
[2011] ATMO 51
•17 June 2011
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Blu-Ray Disc Association [2011] ATMO 51
[2011] ATMO 51
17 June 2011
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case involved the Blu-Ray Disc Association (the Holder) and a dispute concerning the trade mark "BLU-RAY". The court was required to determine whether the Holder possessed exclusive rights to use the "BLU-RAY" mark in Australia, despite it not yet being a registered trade mark.
The central legal issue was whether the term "BLU-RAY" had become a descriptive or generic name for a high-definition optical disc format in Australia, thereby precluding the Holder from claiming exclusive trade mark rights. This involved considering the provisions of the relevant Act, specifically section 24, which addresses situations where a registered trade mark becomes generally accepted as the name of an article after its registration.
The court acknowledged that "BLU-RAY" was likely an invented expression when first adopted between 2002 and 2004. However, it noted that by the time the Holder sought trade mark protection in Australia, and particularly after its official use commenced in November 2006, significant market developments had occurred. The court highlighted the intense "format war" between Blu-ray and HD-DVD, and Blu-ray's eventual success in becoming the sole high-definition DVD format in Australia by February 2008. This market dominance, the court reasoned, created a risk that the term "BLU-RAY" could transition from a distinctive mark to the generic name of the product, a situation analogous to previous cases where a proprietor's monopoly led to a word becoming the common name for a product. The court referenced the principle that a mark can have a descriptive element and still function as a trade mark, but it must not have passed into the language as a generic word.
The central legal issue was whether the term "BLU-RAY" had become a descriptive or generic name for a high-definition optical disc format in Australia, thereby precluding the Holder from claiming exclusive trade mark rights. This involved considering the provisions of the relevant Act, specifically section 24, which addresses situations where a registered trade mark becomes generally accepted as the name of an article after its registration.
The court acknowledged that "BLU-RAY" was likely an invented expression when first adopted between 2002 and 2004. However, it noted that by the time the Holder sought trade mark protection in Australia, and particularly after its official use commenced in November 2006, significant market developments had occurred. The court highlighted the intense "format war" between Blu-ray and HD-DVD, and Blu-ray's eventual success in becoming the sole high-definition DVD format in Australia by February 2008. This market dominance, the court reasoned, created a risk that the term "BLU-RAY" could transition from a distinctive mark to the generic name of the product, a situation analogous to previous cases where a proprietor's monopoly led to a word becoming the common name for a product. The court referenced the principle that a mark can have a descriptive element and still function as a trade mark, but it must not have passed into the language as a generic word.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Blu-Ray Disc Association [2011] ATMO 51
Most Recent Citation
Red Energy Pty Limited [2018] ATMO 66
Cases Cited
16
Statutory Material Cited
0
Thomson v B Seppelt & Sons Ltd
[1925] HCA 40
Thomson v B Seppelt & Sons Ltd
[1925] HCA 40
Unilever Plc v Beiersdorf AG
[2017] ATMO 25