Brussels, 05/02/2001 (Agence Europe) - With the unanimous adoption during its plenary session on 23 and 24 January of the own-initiative opinion presented by Maria Candelas Sanchez Miguel (Workers, Spain) relating to the "exhaustion of registered trademark rights", the European Economic and Social Committee supports the Commission's decision of May 2000 not to amend the current system for the exhaustion of registered trademark rights. In so doing, the Committee considers that there is above all the "need to continue protecting European goods and services identified by trademarks".
We recall that the current system of parallel imports and the exhaustion of registered trademark rights bans imports into the EU of brand name products bought at a lower price in the third countries, without the authorisation of the manufacturer that holds the property rights. Subject to competition from cheaper products of their own brand name, manufacturers would be tempted to relocate in countries where production costs are lower (see EUROPE of 25 and 27 July 2000, and 3 February, p.11).
In its opinion, the Committee:
1) examines the consequences of eventually changing the current system, mainly on European economic growth. Such changes could, in the long term, inhibit investment in new products in Europe, or even lead to the withdrawal of products with registered trademarks that are already to be found on the market because they cannot compete with parallel imports, explains the Committee. The holders of registered trademarks could also decide to reduce their after-sales services or other features of their products (such as a full range of sizes in the case of clothing) that parallel imports do not provide for European consumers given that they are not subject to Community standards.
2) urges in favour of keeping the current exhaustion of registered trademark rights system, because: a) The channels used by importers of parallel products are often those used for counterfeit or pirated goods. Counterfeiting and piracy may have serious consequences on consumer protection, and on public health and safety, mainly because these products are not conceived for the climatic and technical conditions of European consumers. b) The only argument for defending parallel trade is price cutting. Savings for the consumer would be between 0 and 2% only, according to the NERA study (carried out at the request of the Commission);
3) recognises the importance of trademarks at international level. On a global market, European companies must face up to competition from companies that have lower production costs than European companies. The Community exhaustion system protects these companies to a certain extent well as the non-European companies operating in the single market.