Portrait

Jakob F. Dämmer is a specialist lawyer for commercial intellectual property and advises on all questions in this area as well as on competition, copyright, and antitrust law. A focus of his work is the representation of clients in court disputes related to competition law and trademark infringement proceedings.

He began his career in an international business law firm, where he exclusively handled contentious competition law cases. He then worked at an IP boutique in Frankfurt a.M. before joining the firm NOTOS.

Mr. Dämmer has conducted a doctorate on the issue of the effects of the "button solution" and the right of withdrawal on fraud and has dealt intensively with the problem of so-called subscription traps on the internet. He is a member of the German Association for Commercial Intellectual Property and Copyright (GRUR).

Vita

Since 2020
Specialist lawyer for commercial intellectual property

Since 2019
Lawyer at NOTOS

2018 – 2019
Lawyer at Keil & Schaafhausen

2016 – 2018
Research assistant at Beiten Burkhardt (IP/IT/Media practice group)

2016
Admission to the bar

Education

2016 – 2019
Doctorate at Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz

2013 – 2015
Legal preparatory service in the OLG district of Koblenz

2007 – 2013
Studied law at Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz and Pázmány Péter Catholic University Budapest

Memberships

German Association for Commercial Intellectual Property and Copyright (GRUR)

Commentaries / Co-Authorships

Co-author in the commentary on the law against unfair competition: UWG, ed. Fritzsche/Münker/Stollwerk, C.H.Beck 2022

Monographs

• Competitive Distinctiveness vs. Concept Protection – On the Limits of Competition Law Protection of Performance in WRP 2024, 446

• Effects of the "button solution" and the right of withdrawal on fraud – On the tension between economic asset valuation and new civil law protection mechanisms. Baden-Baden 2020 (Nomos Verlag / also diss. Mainz 2019)

Case Commentaries

• BGH: ECJ reference on the concept of an offer for sales promotion, in GRUR-Prax 2024, 209

• BPatG: Independent distinguishing character of the opposition mark "COCO" in the contested mark "HiCoco", in GRUR-Prax 2024, 164

• OLG Köln: No divided traffic understanding within a traffic circle for foodstuffs, in GRUR-Prax 2023. 648

• OLG Schleswig: Unfair use of gearbox and motor oil designations "O.E. M.", in GRUR-Prax 2023, 647

• OLG Hamm: Interpretation of a cease-and-desist declaration, in GRUR-Prax 2023, 505 *

• KG Berlin: Liability of the advertising company for "snippets" from search engine operators, in: GRUR-Prax 2023, 317

• OLG Frankfurt a. M.: Deceptive conduct about the availability of a drug just before market entry, in: GRUR-Prax 2023, 350

• LG Weiden: Unsuccessful cease-and-desist action due to advertising with the designation "Architect" without registration with the Chamber of Architects, in: GRUR-Prax 2022, 678

• OLG Frankfurt a.M.: Requirements for the use of a rental car without a mileage meter with "flat rates", in GRUR-Prax 2022, 484

• LG Hamburg: Exploitation of reputation by imitation of a cult shoe, in GRUR Prax 2022, 27 **

• LG Hamburg: Unfair mediation and publication of customer reviews without reference to counter-services, in GRUR-Prax 2021, 614

• OLG Frankfurt a. M.: eBay must verify violations of product safety obligations by a seller after notification and may have to independently prevent future offers, in GRUR-Prax 2021, 453

• OLG Bamberg: Execution of the rental car transport order issued the previous day without prior trip to the company's location, in GRUR-Prax 2020, 523

• BPatG: Lack of confusion risk between signs for coffee capsules, in GRUR-Prax 2020, 282

• OLG Köln: Understanding of the term "manufacturer" of a product in traffic, in GRUR-Prax 2020, 267

• OLG Hamburg: Employee poaching by executives of a competitor "from within", in GRUR-Prax 2019, 494

• OLG Frankfurt a.M.: Publication of "purchased" customer reviews on the internet without reference to "payment" is unfair, in GRUR-Prax 2019, 193

• OLG Köln: Action for injunction of statements serving legal defense lacks legal interest, in GRUR-Prax 2019, 120

• OLG Köln: Profit extraction due to excessive chargeback fees in terms and conditions, in GRUR-Prax 2018, 481

• OLG Celle: Entry on the Facebook page of a car dealership as advertising, in MMR 2017, 622

• LG Aschaffenburg: Car workshop must not advertise with full damage settlement, in GRUR-Prax 2017, 221

• LG Kiel: Right to information and profit extraction claim due to the use of an ineffective chargeback clause in terms and conditions, in GRUR-Prax 2017, 174

* With lawyer Sophie Krämer
** With Lena Auler