BEYOND GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION: REGULATING SOUND TRADEMARKS IN GEORGIA AND COMPARABLE JURISDICTIONS

This article analyses the legal foundations for protecting sound trademarks in Georgia, in comparison with the European Union and the United States.The 2024 reform of Georgian trademark law, which removed the requirement of graphical representation, enabled the registration of sound marks for the first time and raised the question of how to safeguard such signs without undermining consumer rights or competition.The paper proposes a novel taxonomy of sound marks based on their origin (human-created or naturally occurring) and purpose (intended as trademarks or later acquiring distinctiveness).This classification provides a clearer framework for assessing distinctiveness-whether inherent or acquired-and for distinguishing functional sounds from source-identifying signs.The functionality doctrine, in both utilitarian and aesthetic forms, is evaluated through leading case law, including Harley-Davidson (US), the EU "can opening" decision, and the CJEU's Sieckmann.It is argued that full musical works should not be registrable due to risks of overlap with copyright, while shorter excerpts may be protected where distinctiveness is proven.The article concludes by recommending harmonized standards for sound representation through audio files and verbal descriptions, supported by AI-based comparison tools, to ensure transparency, efficiency, and fair competition.