By a landmark decision issued on 19 December 2025, the Grand Board of Appeal of the EUIPO ruled on whether the name of a world-famous author may be registered as a European Union trade mark for cultural, educational and entertainment goods and services.
The GEORGE ORWELL decision (R 2248/2019-G) provides important clarification on the application of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) EUTMR to names of famous persons, where such names are liable to be perceived by the relevant public as designating the content or subject matter of the goods and services concerned.
The application sought registration of the word sign GEORGE ORWELL as a European Union trade mark for a broad range of goods and services, in particular in Classes 9, 16 and 41, covering recorded media, printed and digital publications, as well as entertainment, cultural and educational services.
During examination, the Office issued a partial refusal, considering that the sign was descriptive and devoid of distinctive character in respect of the goods and services concerned, since the relevant public would immediately perceive the name "George Orwell" as an indication of the subject matter, content or theme of those goods and services.
The Grand Board of Appeal recalls that personal names are not excluded per se from trade mark registration. However, where a name belongs to an universally well-known author, whose body of work is widely disseminated, studied and embedded in general culture, that name may be perceived by the relevant public as designating the content or subject matter of the goods and services at issue.
In the present case, George Orwell is recognised as a major literary figure of the twentieth century, whose works have generated extensive commentary, adaptations and cultural exploitation. In that context, the sign "George Orwell" will be understood as referring to goods or services by or about the author or his work, which constitutes a descriptive characteristic within the meaning of Article 7(1)(c) EUTMR.
The decision draws a fundamental distinction between:
The Grand Board emphasises that, for goods such as books, films, publications or cultural services, the relevant public will not perceive the name "George Orwell" as indicating the undertaking responsible for placing those goods or services on the market, but rather as descriptive information relating to their content. Accordingly, the sign is also devoid of distinctive character within the meaning of Article 7(1)(b) EUTMR.
The Grand Board clarifies that an author’s fame or their inclusion in the cultural heritage does not, in itself, constitute an autonomous ground for refusal. Such factors are relevant only insofar as they influence the perception of the relevant public.
The assessment must be global and fact-specific, taking into account, in particular, the author’s reputation, the dissemination and exploitation of their works, their social and cultural integration, and the realities of the market. The GEORGE ORWELL decision therefore does not establish a general exclusion of famous authors’ names from trade mark protection, but confirms that, in certain circumstances, their descriptive function prevails over their capacity to indicate commercial origin.
Conclusion
Through this decision, the Grand Board of Appeal of the EUIPO clearly affirms that trade mark law cannot be used to confer an exclusive monopoly over signs that the public primarily perceives as cultural references designating the content or subject matter of works.
The ruling invites right holders and heirs to conduct a particularly careful analysis of the actual function of the sign, in light of the goods and services concerned, before pursuing any trade mark filing strategy.
