One leaf
like every
Other.
One leaf
like every
Other.
from
EUIPO decides: No trademark protection for stylized hemp leaf – the sign lacks the necessary distinctiveness to be registered as a trademark.
No distinctive character of a hemp leaf
In its decision of 26.05.2025 – R2253/2024-1, the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO ruled that a stylized hemp leaf, which is framed in a circle by the terms “BASIC HEMP”, “ESTD 04 20” and “CBD AID”, has no distinctive character. The decision was preceded by an appeal. The Office had previously refused registration on other grounds. The sign in its entirety would be perceived by the relevant public as being contrary to public morals, as it promotes or glorifies drug consumption.
In the context of the appeal, the EUIPO did not deal with this further, but based its decision on the fact that the sign was limited to an advertising message.
Since the sign applied for consisted of English words, the Board based its assessment of the grounds for refusal on English-speaking consumers in the European Union, i.e. in any case consumers in Ireland and Malta as part of the Union. In the view of the EUIPO, the surrounding terms were also not sufficient to give the sign sufficient distinctive character.
The Office stated that an English-speaking consumer would understand “BASIC HEMP” as a reference to hemp in its simple or natural form – i.e. a standard hemp variety. “CBD” is commonly known for cannabidiol, a substance from the hemp plant with psychoactive effects. “AID” means aid. The term “CBD AID” is generally understood as “help from cannabidiol”. In “ESTD 04 20”, the consumer would recognize a reference to a date of establishment.
NO protection for pure advertising messages
In the case of advertising slogans, it must be checked whether they contain elements that enable the persons addressed to easily and directly memorize the word sequence as a trademark for certain products or services. If only a general advertising statement is conveyed – without a recognizable reference to the origin or purpose of the goods – consumers pay little attention to the sign and do not memorize it as a trademark.
The EUIPO considered such a mere advertising message to exist in the totality of the word elements concerned:
The verbal elements as a whole are […] limited to the advertising message that the goods in question and retail and online mail order services provide cannabidiol assistance in the form of a standard cannabis strain and are offered by a company established in April 2020 or on April 20
Stylized hemp leaf is not enough
Even the pictorial element of the stylized hemp leaf with a green border was unable to change this:
The stylization does not deviate significantly from the usual representations of a hemp leaf. The sign as a whole is no more than the mere sum of its individual components. The combination of the individual, non-distinctive elements does not show any particular features which could give the sign as a whole distinctive character:
The figurative elements cannot give the sign the required distinctive character either. The stylized representation of a hemp leaf is merely perceived as an indication that the claimed goods and services contain hemp, are made from hemp or relate to such goods.
The EUIPO thus came to the conclusion that the sign applied for does not contain any elements that would allow the target public to memorize it as a sign of a specific commercial origin.
Conclusion
The decision illustrates the high requirements for the distinctiveness of trademarks, especially if they consist of descriptive terms or terms commonly used in advertising. For the goods and services claimed, the sign applied for was not convincing as an indication of commercial origin due to either its word or figurative elements. The combination of terms such as “CBD AID”, “BASIC HEMP” and “ESTD 04 20” was understood as a mere advertising statement that establishes a reference to cannabidiol and hemp and the date of foundation, but does not have any individual distinctive character.
The decision emphasizes that trademarks with references to cannabinoids or hemp products must be carefully examined for their distinctiveness – especially if they contain advertising or purely descriptive statements.
We are happy to
advise you about
Trademark law!
