ACTS THAT MAY CAUSE CONFUSION AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON TOURISM 389 paved the way for UC actions to play their role as broader means of protection against confusing acts. Some difficulties arise from the enforcement of NTMs when cumulative protection strategies occur. These means of protection are commonly used as a way to shield assets through IP; however, when enforcing rights over the product, it must be determined through which specific right is going to be claimed over the product’s feature. For instance, when the shape of a product is protected as a three-dimensional mark and also through product design, the owner must decide whether they are pursuing the infringer over confusion or imitation grounds. In this sense, the functionality doctrine acts as a filter regarding which action to use. By preventing the protection of specific features of a product as a trademark, it compels the producer to use a patent or design system to protect these features. In such cases, there is only the possibility of action against imitation acts. However, for some marks (e.g. three-dimensional) which protect the aesthetic appearance of a product, there is a very thin line regarding the object of protection. A three-dimensional mark protecting the form of a product allows the enforcement of both imitation and confusion actions. Disregarding the enforcement limitations of the UC actions against confusion acts, there is no doubt of its usefulness as a guarantee of rights against unfair conducts with a broader scope than the trademark law. Furthermore, it functions not only as a mean of protection for competitors, but it also protects consumers and the market. 3. (THE NEED FOR) IMITATION The influence of innovation in the tourism sector is undeniable (Čivre & Gomezlj, 2015) as the tourism market is highly competitive and tourism firms must constantly innovate in order to keep up with such competition. Innovation within the tourism sector still has some weak areas, such as the fact that any innovation is highly visible and vulnerable to imitation, as well as the low standards of protection through the IP mechanism, given their particular nature. Hjalager’s own interpretation and adaptation of the Schumpeterian innovation typology for the services sector (Hjalager, 1994) provide us with five types of innovations: product innovations, process innovations, management
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==