Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
Graduate in International Commercial Law, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
2
PhD Graduate in Public International Law, Department of Law, Mofid University, Qom, Iran
10.22091/diplic.2026.15086.1040
Abstract
Consumer confusion arises when a trademark fails to perform its distinctive function in the process of identifying the origin of goods. Nevertheless, Article 96 of the Industrial Property Protection Law of 2024, despite emphasizing the prohibition of misleading trademarks, provides no clear standard for assessing such confusion nor does it define the notion of the average consumer. A comparative examination of doctrinal sources and judicial practices in the European Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom demonstrates that these legal systems determine confusion based on the overall impression created by the trademark on the mind of the relevant consumer, through a multifactorial test. This assessment simultaneously considers visual, phonetic, and conceptual similarity, the distinctiveness of the trademark, the nature of the goods, and actual market conditions. By contrast, an analysis of existing judgments and judicial practice in Iranian courts proves that, due to the absence of legislative criteria, courts largely rely on variable approaches. This has resulted in the assessment of misleading character becoming discretionary, undermining the coherence and predictability necessary for the economic function of trademarks. As a result, the effective implementation of Article 96 requires the formulation of a localized multifactorial standard, inspired by comparative legal systems, along with a precise redefinition of both the average consumer and the notion of confusion.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)