23/07/2026
This was the question facing the EUIPO Grand Board of Appeal (‘The Grand Board’), which considers only certain legally challenging cases. In May 2026, it delivered its decision in joined cases R 1719/2019-G and R 1922/2019-G. This is now likely to become a leading authority on the registrability of titles of literary works in the EUIPO. The trouble is, the answer is still “it depends”.
The book titles in question are ANIMAL FARM, arguably the most famous twentieth-century political allegory, and 1984, the dystopian classic. These books were written by George Orwell, who died in 1950. These undoubtedly famous titles have been used beyond references to the books themselves. The EU trade mark applications in question were filed by the late Sonia Brownell’s estate. Sonia was George Orwell’s second wife. They were married just three months before his death, and she served as the guardian of his literary legacy until her death in 1980.
The trade mark applications filed by the estate were split. Some covered books, DVDs, toys, games and entertainment services in classes 9,16, 28 (some) and 41. The marks for these goods and services were initially rejected on grounds of descriptiveness and lack of distinctive character. The signs ANIMAL FARM and 1984 are widely known and it was held that use in relation to goods and services here would be perceived as a reference to the novel, rather than an indication of origin.
Other applications were granted registration for the goods and services which did not read directly onto what was termed “content”. They included merchandise in classes 18, 21, 25, 28 (some), and 45.
The rejection was appealed to the EUIPO Board of Appeal. That Board referred the case to the Grand Board because of divergent decisions in the past relating to the outcome of filings to protect the signs THE JUNGLE BOOK, PINOCCHIO, Frühlingsfest der Volksmusik, Le Journal d’Anne Frank, and others. It was time for the Grand Board to come to a view with an aim to allow for consistent treatment moving forward.
Various parties filed observations on behalf of brand holders, including INTA. Submissions covered the law in a number of EU Member States, as well as the interplay with copyright protection.
The key question for registrability is whether the use of the sign which comes from a book title indicates commercial origin, rather than identifying the specific literary work. This can vary from title to title.
The Grand Board upheld the original rejection, finding that each of the terms is descriptive for certain goods and therefore devoid of distinctive character.
Importantly, the Grand Board confirmed that there is no automatic ban or automatic acceptance of the registrability of famous literary titles, clarifying that a case-by-case assessment will be applied.
Is the assessment the same as that for film titles? Or the signs used in a series of books or films with sequels and prequels? The Executive Director of the EUIPO submitted comments, including observations that the consumer perception analysis applies more broadly to other content-based goods and services, including films. Further reference was made to the obiter dicta comments in the EUIPO Board of Appeal decision in a case relating to the sign DR No (T-435/05), noting that (albeit in relation to evidence in proof of use proceedings) consumers would be more likely to perceive the title of a series of books as a badge of origin over films or the title of a single book. The Grand Board did not expressly adopt these observations in its legal reasoning. After all, this case was about the registrability of the titles of standalone literary works, not a series of books using the same sign in their titles.
This content is for general information only. Its content is not a statement of the law on any subject and does not constitute advice. Please contact Reddie & Grose LLP for advice before taking any action in reliance on it.
