The digital environment has put pressure on one of the classic principles of trademark law: territoriality. In a context where any website is potentially accessible from multiple countries, a key question arises for companies and rights holders: under what circumstances is an online activity considered to be directed at the public of the European Union (EU) and, consequently, likely to constitute a trademark infringement in that territory?
The ruling by the Provincial Court of Alicante dated September 15, 2025, provides relevant criteria in this regard by analyzing whether the activities of the website camelstore.com constituted an infringement of the Spanish and EU CAMEL trademarks.
The CAMEL Case: Context and Conflict
The litigation pitted Japan Tobacco Inc., the owner of several CAMEL trademarks, against two companies that sold products (footwear, clothing, and accessories) using marks—both word marks and graphic marks—that were identical or very similar to that trademark.
The business was conducted online, primarily through the website camelstore.com.
The lawsuit was initially dismissed. The court found that it had not been sufficiently proven that the activity was directed at the EU public, even though the website was accessible from within the EU. Among the factors considered were the use of English, pricing in U.S. dollars, and the absence of explicit references to the EU.
However, the Provincial Court reviews this approach and offers an interpretation that is more in line with the reality of e-commerce.
Accessibility vs. Targeted Activity: The Key to Trademark Law
One of the key points of the ruling is the confirmation of a well-established principle in European trademark law: the mere fact that a website is accessible from the EU is not sufficient to establish infringement.
For an infringement to exist, it must be established that the sign is used in the course of trade within the EU. This involves determining whether the activity is in fact directed at consumers in this territory, in accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
This approach prevents the automatic and excessive application of trademark law on the Internet, but it also requires a more rigorous evidentiary analysis.
Evidence demonstrating the EU's market orientation
Unlike the court of first instance, the Provincial Court found that there was indeed sufficient evidence to establish that camelstore.com’s activities were directed at the EU public.
Actual sales in the EU
One of the most decisive factors was the existence of actual sales to consumers in Spain, France, the Netherlands, and Portugal. This demonstrates that the activity was not merely potential but was actually taking place in the EU market.
Uninterrupted commercial operations in the EU
The documentation provided showed hundreds of transactions destined for EU countries, indicating stable, ongoing commercial activity in this region rather than isolated transactions.
Specific Shipping Terms for the EU
The website included detailed information on shipping to 23 EU countries, including delivery times, costs, and terms. This feature reinforces the company's intention to target European consumers in a clear and organized manner.
Language and currency: non-determining factors
The Court ruled that the use of English or U.S. dollars does not preclude a focus on the EU. English is commonly used in international trade, and automatic currency conversion eliminates real barriers for consumers.
Use of Additional Platforms
In addition to the website, the products were sold in the EU through platforms such as AliExpress, which reinforced the existence of a sales strategy in the EU market.
Trademark Infringement: Use in the EU Economy
Once the EU market orientation has been established, the Court examines whether there has been a trademark infringement.
The court concludes that it does, based on several factors:
- Identity or high similarity between the signs used and the CAMEL trademarks
- Use for identical or related products
- Reputation of the prior trademark
- The existence of a connection in the consumer's mind
In this context, it finds that there has been an improper exploitation of the trademark’s distinctiveness and reputation, which constitutes an infringement under Spanish and EU trademark law.
Legal Consequences of the Judgment
The Provincial Court overturns the lower court's decision and grants the claim.
Among the main measures agreed upon are:
- Discontinuation of the Use of the CAMEL Trademark and the camelstore.com Domain Name
- Recall and Destruction of Non-Compliant Products
- Compensation for damages (calculated, among other criteria, based on gross revenue)
- Daily penalty for noncompliance
Practical Takeaways from the Case for Trademark Law
This ruling confirms that, in the field of trademark law, infringement on the Internet cannot be analyzed based on a single, isolated factor. Neither the accessibility of a website from within the EU is sufficient, nor do factors such as language, currency, or domain name, taken alone, rule out the existence of infringement. The analysis must be based on a comprehensive assessment of the available evidence.
The decisive factor is being able to establish that the mark is used in the course of trade within the EU. In this case, the existence of actual sales, shipping arrangements to multiple EU countries, and ongoing commercial operations were key to demonstrating that the activity was directed toward the EU market.
From a broader perspective, this case reflects one of the main challenges currently facing trademark law: balancing the global nature of the Internet with the principle of territoriality. The ruling shows that mere accessibility or isolated sales are not sufficient; rather, a contextual and evidentiary analysis is necessary to determine the true focus of the commercial activity.
For companies, this approach has direct implications for both the protection of their trademarks and their digital strategies. Monitoring, evidence gathering, and analyzing how online marketing is structured are essential for identifying risks and acting with legal certainty in an increasingly globalized environment.
Lorena Sánchez, Attorney in the Trademark Practice Group at Elzaburu