Legal news and trends for Canadian in-house counsel and c-suite executives
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/52834
INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT brand Should a speak for itself? New signage requirements by the Office québécois de la langue française are starting to raise questions about the power of a company's brand and who is the custodian of what many retailers view as their most important asset. By Helen Burnett-Nichols For many retailers already established in Quebec, as well as those looking to set up shop in the province, a new campaign to ensure that outside store signage complies with the Charter of the French Language is leading to questions about what is ultimately best for their brand. Concerned by a fresh upsurge of multinational retailers coming into Que- bec and using trademarks exclusively in other languages, the Office québécois de la langue française has made the issue a priority, kicking off a campaign last November aimed at urging companies to comply with language requirements with respect to signage. "The legal requirement is that a descriptor has to be added to a trademark," says Louise Marchand, president and chief executive of the Office québécois de la langue française who spoke to Canadian Lawyer InHouse in an interview conducted in French and translated into English. Although one of the Charter's regula- tions says a trademark can be used in a language other than French on public signs unless a French version has been registered, the Office explains that if that 30 • FEBRUARY 2012 trademark in another language is used as a business name, companies have to add a French descriptor or slogan to explain the activities of that business. Without naming names of companies who it says don't comply, one example of a retailer that does, says Marchand, is optic- al company New Look EyeWear, which in Quebec uses the name Lunetterie New Look, adding a description in French to its brand name. "We think that it is very important that we send a very clear signal that the law has to apply and that large compan- ies who use their trademark as a name comply with the law," says Marchand. While the campaign is driven by the arrival of more "big-box" retailers, the requirement applies to all businesses. But rather than a question of compan- ies failing to abide by the legal require- ments of the Charter or being dismissive of cultural issues, Kelly Moffatt, head of the marketing and distribution prac- tice group at Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP, says many retailers already thought they were working within the Charter's legal framework. "A lot of the retailers, certainly clients I deal with, are good INHOUSE corporate citizens, and they say, 'this is the law, this is what the Charter says, and this is what the Charter requires and this is what we have been doing and we continue to do,'" she says. "There [have] not been any recent changes to the Charter, so we're dealing with the same legislation and regula- tions that we've been dealing with in Quebec for quite some time," she adds. With the new campaign, the Office, she says, is taking a trademark analysis approach, saying that when you put that company sign on the outside of a store, it is not being used as a trademark, but as a trade name. From the retailer perspective, they say they are not putting their firm name (a numbered company, for example) on their stores, but rather using a trade- mark to identify their products and ser- vices and distinguish them from other retailers down the street, she says. "A trademark under the Trade- marks Act is used with services if you display it or use it in the performance or the advertisement of your services," explains Moffatt. "It's not surprising that most