Avatarurile juridice ale creaţiilor industriale „CROCS”. Studiu de caz despre cum se construieşte o afacere bazată pe creaţii intelectuale, despre anteriorităţi distructive de noutate, mărci tridimensionale şi lipsă de distinctivitate
Legal avataries of „CROCS” industrial creations. Case study on how to build a business based on intellectual creations, on destructive novelty antecedents, three-dimensional brands and lack of distinctiveness

Summary/Abstract: According to those who created/chose the word „croc”, he wanted to suggest the well being both in the water and on land, similar to most in which crocodiles live in their two living environments. The word, they say, was abbreviated to make it appealing, but also easily pronounced and memorized both in business and by consumers. And if the crocs clogs were originally designed for water sports and if the association was made to suggest a state of comfort in the two environments of living and spending time by people, you must admit that there is an intellectual activity, that there is originality, novelty and distinctiveness in the word "invented". But we do not believe that it is also a sufficient creative activity and to be able to attribute to the word „croc” attributed by the „work” necessary for it to be protected by copyright, which is why I consider that they are protected by this possibility (and cumulatively) only as a trade name and trademark. Croc Inc. sign was approached as the trade name of the footwear manufacturer now known worldwide as „CROCS” founded in the US by three entrepreneurs who, although they had no knowledge in the field, had entrepreneurial spirit, courage, motivation and vision. However, the „CROCS” sign, sometimes accompanied by figurative elements and colors, was also registered as a trademark, demonstrating the sign's ability to be as much a trademark as a trademark. A brand that soon became famous and which, although very young, is about to degenerate, because the word „CROCS” already designates all over the world a model of footwear that the brand „CROCS” has made known regardless of who is the manufacturer or who is the sign (other than „CROCS”) under which it is sold. The outer shape of the original and original product is (was?) An industrial model registered in the USA and Europe. The product „footwear with vents” and the manufacturing process thereof is a patented invention. An important business was built around them and with their help. Because these creations belong to "Crocs Inc.", a company that appeared in the early 2000s, has had a rapid evolution and has managed to be only a few years since the launch (2002/2003) of its model of shoes sold under the brand name „CROCS” to make it well known all over the world. Determine the transformation of the sign indicating its commercial origin (brand) into the name of a product which, despite its ugliness, enjoys a success that has made it a "universal phenomenon" since it is not a country on Earth in which to be known, copied, imitated, counterfeited. Beloved by some consumers, ugly by others, recognized by industrial property offices that have admitted to registration or patenting „CROCS” creations, contested by competitors and invalidated (but also revalidated) in some jurisdictions, „CROCS” creations demonstrate by their declines how important is the intellectual/industrial property in business, how necessary is the knowledge of the field, of the registration and/or patenting procedures, how significant and prejudicial they are for the title of their next negligences or of their bad administrations. But it also proves and has that intellectual/industrial property rights is not a right to certainty, but is one still built on sand, and in the face of spectacular technological developments it is unlikely to become stable like the common property law. I recall here that if the Internet had been regulated before its appearance, it would not have existed and that artificial intelligence is another challenge for which intellectual property law has not yet found adequate regulation. Demonstrates that in resolving disputes in this matter the judgments are highly personalized, and the power of judges' judgment is so great and with such important consequences as to fully justify the idea that this (their personal assessment) can and must be censored by the courts of judicial control, the wrong evaluation of the fulfillment or non fulfillment of some protection conditions being, rightly, assimilated to the error in the interpretation and application of the laws.

• Details
• Contents