CASE COMMENTS : UNFAIR PRACTICES – UNFAIR COMPETITION – ECONOMIC PARASITISM – IMITATION OF A COMPETITOR PRODUCTS – PATENT EXPIRY– MANUFACTURING

Unfair competition: The Court of Cassation holds that the only imitation product whose patent has expired is not an act of parasitism (Lego, Lunatic construction)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Cass. com, May 3, 2012, Lego v Lunatic construction, No. 11-18077 The ruling handed down by the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation on 3 May 2012 is interesting in that it clarifies the contours of economic parasitism. In this case, a company marketing toys in the form of stackable children's building bricks for which it had an expired patent sued a company manufacturing furniture on the basis of economic parasitism. It alleged that the defendant was marketing modular furniture elements which took on the shape and proportions of its play bricks by oversizing them, which it claimed was characteristic of a placement in its wake. The Paris Court of

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • University Littoral-Cote d’Opale (Dunkerque)

Quotation

Rodolphe Mesa, Unfair competition: The Court of Cassation holds that the only imitation product whose patent has expired is not an act of parasitism (Lego, Lunatic construction), 3 May 2012, Concurrences N° 3-2012, Art. N° 48416, pp. 148-150

Visites 315

All reviews