1. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 OHIM User Satisfaction Survey 2008 February 2009 ER- 0484/1/00 A50/000021

2. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 I ndex Objectives and Data Sheet Results: User Satisfaction Index (USI) Complaints Identification of STRENGTHS and WEAKNESSES LEVEL 1: Image, Core Business, Information and Communication LEVEL 2: Global image LEVEL 2: Core business LEVEL 3: Community trade mark LEVEL 3: Community design LEVEL 3: Appeals LEVEL 3: Register LEVEL 2: Information and communication e-business tools Other issues: CONCLUSIONS AND DIAGNOSTICS Perception of the development of the OHIM ANNEX I: Results by countries ANNEX II: METHODOLOGY

3. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 Objectives Data Sheet and

4. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 4 Objectives For the third consecutive year, the OFFICE FOR HARMONIZATION IN THE INTERNAL MARKET (OHIM) has commissioned GfK to conduct a satisfaction survey of its users, the design and measurement system for which were established in 2005 and whose main objective is to measure the level of satisfaction among users regarding the various services the OHIM provides. MAIN OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY … OBJECTIVES MEASURE THE LEVEL OF PERCEIVED QUALITY of the services that the OHIM offers its users. MEASURE AND RANK THE CONTRIBUTION of each aspect in overall user satisfaction. ESTABLISH OBJECTIVES AND PRIORITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT EVALUATE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE ACTIONS that are undertaken 124 3

5. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 5 Data Sheet Any individual who has been in touch with the OHIM in the context of any proceedings in 2008, whether as an agent or as a proprietor acting on his own behalf (including proprietors employees and type 5 agents). Sampling unit is the individual. From 10/1/2008 to 31/1/2009 CAWI (Computer Assisted Web Interview) questionnaire conducted via the web, with two reminders Languages: the 5 languages of the Office TARGET PUBLIC TARGET GROUP FIELDWORK QUESTIONNAIRE

6. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 6 Target Group and Final Sample Distribution The OHIM drew from its databases those users who met the conditions describing the target public (those having had any professional dealings with the OHIM in 2007). A total of 70,355 (57,390 proprietors / 12,965 agents) possible contacts were identified. A total of 29,361 email addresses was available, but not all of them were correct, as 4,283 messages sent were returned as undeliverable. By the end of the response time a total of 1,598 questionnaires had been received, which gave a net response rate of 7% and an optimum sample size in terms of statistical representation of the results (a sampling margin of error of +/-2.5 % on a level of confidence of 95%). The following charts show the comparison between the profiles of the users in the target public and the findings of the survey.

7. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 7 70,355 29,361 4,283 Undeliverable mail RESPONDENTS 1,598 RESPONSE RATE: 7% of net mailing addresses TOTAL OHIM Users AGENTS PROPRIETORS (*) (*) INCLUDING EMPLOYEES (type 5 agents) (in the last year) E-MAIL 685 913 Target Group and Final Sample Distribution 57,390 12,965 19,118 10,243

8. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 8 The OHIM has defined and publicised on its website a set of accessibility, timeliness and quality objectives in terms of what users can expect when dealing with the Office. Are you aware of such standards? Yes 38% No 62% AGENTS PROPRIETORS TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 685) TOTAL AGENTS (No: 913) Yes 38% No 62%

9. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 R esults User-Satisfaction -Index (USI)

10. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 10 AGENTS WHO HAVE NOT COMPLAINED AGENTS WHO HAVE COMPLAINED 68,6 USI 67,0 USI AGENT 59,0 USI RESULTS User-Satisfaction -Index (USI) 2005 / 2006 / 2007/2008 PROPRIETOR S WHO HAVE NOT COMPLAINED PROPRIETOR S WHO HAVE COMPLAINED 62,5 USI 61,9 USI PROP. 55,0 USI +3,8 +5,7 2005 68,3 USI 59,5 USI 63,5 USI 57,3 USI 2006 -0,8 +0,9 70,9 USI 64,7 USI 69,9 USI 59,7 USI 2007 66,2 USI AGENT 62,8 USI PROP. 70,0 USI AGENT 68,5 USI PROP. +2,5 +1,7 74,8 USI 61,1 USI 71,4 USI 60,5 USI 2008 72,5 USI AGENT 70,2 USI PROP.

11. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 R esults Complaints

12. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 12 RESULTS COMPLAINTS 2007 TOTAL AGENTS (No: 913) TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 685) 2008 YES 15% NO 85% NO 86% YES 14% Yes, by telephone 5% Yes, I submitted it in writing 11% No 84% 16% YES Yes, by telephone 3% Yes, I submitted it in writing 8% No 89% YES 11% Have you filed any complaints with the OHIM over the last year?

13. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 13 RESULTS COMPLAINTS How would you evaluate the way your complaint was dealt with? PROPRIETORS AGENTS AGENTS (No:108)PROPRIETORS (No:71) COMPLAINTS AGENT COMPLAINTS PROPRIETOR 2005200620072008 EFFICIENTLY QUICKLY 20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90% PROFESSIONALLY SATISFACTION STRATEGIC WEAKNESSES STRATEGIC STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES INFLUENCE EFFICIENTLY QUICKLY 20% 30%40%50%60%70%80%90% 2005200620072008 PROFESSIONALLY STRATEGIC WEAKNESSES STRATEGIC STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES STRENGTHS SATISFACTION INFLUENCE 55% + + - - 16% 11%

14. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 14 RESULTS COMPLAINTS Has a satisfactory solution been found to your problem? 2007 PROPRIETORS (No:71)AGENTS (No:108) 41% 46% 16% 11% 17% 27% 25% SOLVED SATISFACTORILY SOLVED UNSAT.SOLVED PENDING PARTLY S. PENDING PARTLY S. SATISFACTORILY UNSAT. SOLVED 56% SOLVED 58% COMPLAINTS AGENT COMPLAINTS PROPRIETOR 16% 11% 34% 30% 19% 21% 19% 14% 28% 34% PENDING PARTLY S. 2008 UNSAT.SOLVED UNSAT.SOLVED SATISFACTORILY SOLVED SATISFACTORILY SOLVED 53% SOLVED 51% PROPRIETORS (No:71)AGENTS (No:108)

15. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 LEVEL 1: Image, complaints, core business, information USI (User Satisfaction Index) OHIM IMAGE INFORMAT. & COMMUNIC. COM- PLAINTS LEVEL 1 CORE BUSINESS

16. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 16 RESULTS LEVEL1: CORE BUSINESS, IMAGE, INFORMATION Every user satisfied No users satisfied 62% 53% 67% 65% 59% 68% 69% 68% 71% 77% 66% CORE BUSINESSIMAGEINFORMATION 2005 2006 2007 2008 + 9 + 3 -2 57% AGENTS TOTAL AGENTS (No: 913) PROPRIETORS 50% 59% 49% 57% 58% 41% 65% 67% 58% 72% 66% 64% CORE BUSINESSIMAGEINFORMATION + 7 + 6 55% (minimum) TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 685) 2005 2006 2007 2008

17. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 17 No users satisfied RESULTS LEVEL1: OHIM EMPLOYEES 65% 68% 65% 51% 80% 66% 65% 67% 71% 61% 44% 80% 67% 68% 72% 64% 52% 81% 70% 73% 77% 70% 57% 85% 76% COMPETENTRELIABLE with PROFESSIONALISM EFFICIENT TELPH. EASY TO CONTACT POLITE, FRIENDLY RESPONSIVE TO USERS NEEDS satisfied ENQUIRIE S Every user 55% (minimum) 55% (minimum) 2005 2006 2007 2008 AGENTS TOTAL AGENTS (No: 913) + 5 + 6 + 5 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 6 61% 63% 52% 73% 61% 65% 64% 69% 61% 47% 75% 64% 70% 71% 74% 69% 57% 78% 69% 77% 74% 77% 75% 64% 84% 76% COMPETENTRELIABLE with PROFESSIONALISM EFFICIENT TELPH. EASY TO CONTACT POLITE, FRIENDLY RESPONSIVE TO USERS NEEDS ENQUIRIES No users satisfied Every user 55% (minimum) 55% (minimum) PROPRIETORS 2005 2006 2007 2008 TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 685) + 7 + 3 + 6 + 7 + 6 + 7

18. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 LEVEL 2: 0VERALL IMAGE USI (Users Satisfaction Index) OHIM IMAGE LEVEL 2 OVERALL IMAGE

19. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 19 RESULTS LEVEL2: OVERALL IMAGE RESULTS Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses LEVEL2: OVERALL IMAGE STRATEGIC WEAKNESSES STRATEGIC STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES TOTAL AGENTS (No: 913) Swiftness Transparency Modernity Prestige Conscientiousness Professionalism Quality of service 20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90% 2005200620072008 INFLUENCE SATISFACTION + - + - AGENTS

20. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 LEVEL 2: CORE BUSINESS USI (Users Satisfaction Index) LEVEL 2 USI (Users Satisfaction Index) CORE BUSINESS APPEAL REGISTER CTMRCD

21. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 21 Over the last year, in which of the following areas have you personally had contact with the OHIM? 79% 14% 9% 32% 5% 29% 1% 10% 1% 56% 80% 15% 10% 25% 4% 31% 1% 8% 0% 60% 82% 13% 12% 25% 3% 26% 1% 6% 1% 61% 77% 11% 8% 17% 3% 23% 0% 4% 1% 61% 2005 2006 2007 2008 93% 27% 24% 70% 20% 52% 4% 31% 1,6% 68% 94% 35% 31% 21% 53% 3% 29% 2,1% 68% 91% 37% 32% 64% 21% 49% 5% 27% 1,7% 62% 91% 34% 29% 65% 21% 45% 5% 26% 2,4% 62% Application for a CTM Application for an international trade mark designating the EC Application for an international trade mark based on a CTM Opposition CTM invalidity request Application to register a Community design (RCD) RCD invalidity request CTM appeal RCD appeal Register 72% 2005 2006 2007 2008 PROPRIETORS AGENTS TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 685) TOTAL AGENTS (No: 913)

22. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 22 RESULTS RESULTS LEVEL2: CORE BUSINESS CTMRCDAPPEALRegister Every user satisfied No users satisfied 2005 2006 2007 2008 AGENTS TOTAL AGENTS (No: 913) 50% 59% 44% 68% 46% 70% 60% 51% 67% 60% 77% 71% 79% 58% 75% + 8 + 2 + 14 + 7 No: 245 No: 839 No: 407 No :562 CTMRCDAPPEALRegister PROPRIETORS 2005 2006 2007 2008 55% (minimum) TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 685) 57% 60% 45% 37% 60% 67% 52% 53% 63% 72% 39% 68% 71% 78% 70% + 8 + 6 + 31 + 2 (*) (*) No: 31No :561No :160No: 421

23. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 LEVEL 3: CORE BUSINESS / CTM USI (Users Satisfaction Index)

24. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 24 Every user satisfied No users satisfied 55% (minimum) RESULTS: RESULTS: CTM 50% 26% 31% 52% 40% 61% 80% 63% 72% 68% 75% CTM APPLICATIONSOPPOSITIONSCTM INVALIDITY 57% 38% 28% 58% 39% 43% 71% 56% 60% 80% 63% CTM APPLICATIONSOPPOSITIONSCTM INVALIDITY 2005 2006 2007 2008 AGENTS PROPRIETORS 2005 2006 2007 2008 PROPRIETORS (No: 561) (No: 839) (*) (*) No: 20 (No: 589) (No: 193) (No: 561) (No: 115) TOTAL AGENTS (No: 839) + 9 + 7 + 3 - 8 + 5 + 12

25. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 25 How important is it to you that the OHIM sets time standards for the examination, publication and registration of CTMs? PROPIETORS: 83% AGENTS: 86% IMPORTANT (7-10) RESULTS RESULTS: CTM APPLICATIONS 1% 0% 1% 2% 4% 5% 12% 13% 14% 46% 0% 1% 4% 6% 12% 9% 15% 46% 0123456 78910 AGENTS PROPRIETORS (0) Not important ------------ Very important (10)

26. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 26 RESULTS RESULTS: CTM APPLICATIONS OHIM is currently finalising the examination of 80% of CTM applications where no objections are raised within 23 days (as of Q3- 2008). Around 80% of CTMs where no objections are raised and no national search is requested are being published within 13 weeks of receipt (as of Q3-2008). Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past year? 23% 5% 34% 38% 57% 3% 26% 15% AGENTSPROPRIETORS CANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTER 24% 3% 33% 40% 61% 2% 23% 14% CANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTER AGENTSPROPRIETORS

27. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 27 RESULTS RESULTS: CTM APPLICATIONS CANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTER 80% of CTM applications where no objections have been raised and no opposition has been filed are ready for registration within 27 weeks of receipt (as of Q3-2008). 25% 62% 3% 2% 35% 23% 38% 13% AGENTSPROPRIETORS Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past year?

28. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 28 Do you think it is important that the OHIM sets quality standards for the classification of CTM applications and the absolute grounds examination? RESULTS RESULTS: CTM APPLICATIONS PROPIETORS: 76% AGENTS: 82% IMPORTANT (7-10) (0) Not important ------------ Very important (10) 1% 0% 1% 5% 14% 17% 36% 1% 0% 1% 4% 8% 13% 16% 14% 33% 0123456 78910 AGENTS PROPRIETORS

29. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 29 RESULTS RESULTS: CTM APPLICATIONS Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past year? AGENTSPROPRIETORS CANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTERCANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTER AGENTSPROPRIETORS More than 90% of decisions on classification comply with OHIMs defined quality standards. Well over 90% of OHIM decisions on absolute grounds comply with the pre-set quality standards. 32% 67% 5% 1% 44% 23% 19% 9% 36% 67% 4% 1% 45% 23% 15% 9%

30. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 30 … that the OHIM sets time standards for the examination, publication and registration of CTMs? … that the OHIM sets quality standards for the classification of CTM applications and the absolute grounds examination? IMPORTANT (7-10) 86% POSITIVE CHANGE 38% 40% 38% 19% 15% How important is it to you… SUMMARY SUMMARY: CTM APPLICATIONS OHIM is currently finalising the examination of 80% of CTM applications where no objections are raised within 23 days (as of Q3-2008). Around 80% of CTMs where no objections are raised and no national search is requested are being published within 13 weeks of receipt (as of Q3-2008) 80% of CTM applications where no objections have been raised and no opposition has been filed are ready for registration within 27 weeks of receipt (as of Q3-2008) More than 90% of decisions on classification comply with OHIMs defined quality standards. Well over 90% of OHIM decisions on absolute grounds comply with the pre-set quality standards. 15% 14% 13% 9% 83% 82% 76% AGENTSPROPRIETORS

31. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 31 How important is it to you that the OHIM sets time standards for the admissibility phase of proceedings and for the notification of the decisions? RESULTS RESULTS: CTM OPPOSITION PROPIETORS: 87% AGENTS: 81% IMPORTANT (7-10) (0) Not important ------------ Very important (10) AGENTS PROPRIETORS 1% 0% 1% 5% 8% 14% 16% 15% 36% 1% 0% 2% 6% 13% 15% 19% 40% 0123456 78910

32. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 32 RESULTS RESULTS: CTM OPPOSITION Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past year? For around 80 % of opposition files, the admissibility phase is finalized within 54 days of receiving the opposition (as of Q3-2008, if no suspension occurred). For around 80% of opposition files, the decision is notified within 55 weeks of finalizing the adversarial part of the proceedings (as of Q3- 2008, if no suspension occurred). 23% 42% 6% 3% 49% 41% 22% 14% 35% 45% 5% 6% 42% 34% 17% 15% PROPRIETORS CANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTERCANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTER AGENTSPROPRIETORSAGENTS

33. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 33 For CTM oppositions, how important is it to you that OHIM sets quality standards for its decisions? RESULTS RESULTS: CTM OPPOSITION PROPIETORS: 80% AGENTS: 77% IMPORTANT (7-10) (0) Not important ------------ Very important (10) AGENTS PROPRIETORS 1% 0% 2% 4% 5% 11% 13% 39% 0% 3% 6% 10% 15% 17% 38% 0123456 78910

34. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 34 RESULTS RESULTS: CTM OPPOSITION Over 85% of opposition decisions comply with the OHIMs quality standards. AGENTSPROPRIETORS Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past year? CANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTER 34% 43% 5% 4% 49% 35% 12% 18%

35. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 35 SUMMARY SUMMARY: CTM OPPOSITION … that the OHIM sets time standards for the admissibility phase of proceedings and for the notification of the decisions? …for CTM oppositions, that OHIM sets quality standards for its decisions? IMPORTANT (7-10) 81% POSITIVE CHANGE 22% 17% 12% How important is it to you… For around 80 % of opposition files, the admissibility phase is finalized within 54 days of receiving the opposition (as of Q3-2008, if no suspension occurred) For around 80% of opposition files, the decision is notified within 55 weeks of finalizing the adversarial part of the proceedings (as of Q3-2008, if no suspension occurred) Over 85% of opposition decisions comply with the OHIMs quality standards. 14% 15% 18% 87% 77% 80% AGENTSPROPRIETORS

36. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 LEVEL 3: CORE BUSINESS / RCD USI (Users Satisfaction Index)

37. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 37 RESULTS: RESULTS: RCD Every user satisfied No users satisfied 55% (minimum) 2005 2006 2007 2008 AGENTS PROPRIETORS 2005 2006 2007 2008 PROPRIETORS (No: 160)TOTAL AGENTS (No: 407) -2 -50 71% 62% 70% 67% 84% 52% 82% 58% RCD APPLICATIONS (No:407) RCD INVALIDITY (No:42) 67% 44% 67% 77% 100% 78% RCD APPLICATIONS (No:160) 50% + 6 + 1 No minimum sample RCD INVALIDITY (No:2*)

38. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 38 How important is it to you that the OHIM sets time standards for acknowledgement of receipt and publication of RCDs? RESULTS RESULTS: RCD PROPIETORS: 80% AGENTS: 83% IMPORTANT (7-10) (0) Not important ------------ Very important (10) AGENTS PROPRIETORS 1% 0% 1% 4% 8% 15% 17% 13% 37% 0% 1% 0% 4% 8% 21% 11% 41% 0123456 78910

39. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 39 RESULTS RESULTS: RCD For 80% of design applications, registration of the RCD is published within 55 days (as of Q3-2008) AGENTSPROPRIETORS Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past year? CANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTER 22% 58% 3% 41% 22% 33% 18%

40. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 40 How important is it to you that the OHIM sets quality standards for the registration of RCD applications? (0) Not important ------------ Very important (10) RESULTS RESULTS: RCD PROPIETORS: 84% AGENTS: 84% IMPORTANT (7-10) AGENTS PROPRIETORS 0% 1% 5% 6% 16% 19% 14% 36% 0% 1% 0% 3% 8% 16% 15% 14% 39% 0123456 78910

41. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 41 RESULTS RESULTS: RCD Over 95% of RCD publications comply with the OHIM quality standards AGENTSPROPRIETORS CANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTER Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past year? 24% 60% 2% 1% 45% 26% 29% 13%

42. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 42 SUMMARY SUMMARY: RCD … that the OHIM sets time standards for acknowledgement of receipt and publication of RCDs? …that the OHIM sets quality standards for the registration of RCD applications? IMPORTANT (7-10) 83% POSITIVE CHANGE 33% 29% How important is it to you… For 80% of design applications, registration of the RCD is published within 55 days (as of Q3-2008). Over 95% of RCD publications comply with the OHIM quality standards. 18% 13% 80% 84% AGENTSPROPRIETORS

43. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 LEVEL 3: CORE BUSINESS / APPEAL USI (Users Satisfaction Index)

44. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 44 RESULTS : APPEAL APPLICATIONS How do you rate the quality of decisions of the Boards of Appeal? 2% 1% 0% 4% 6% 9% 20% 18% 13% 7% 4% 14% 0% 3% 6% 3% 6% 10% 23% 3% 42% 0 = very poor 12345678910 = excellent DONT KNOW AGENTS PROPRIETORS PROPIETORS: 45% AGENTS: 60% SATISFIED (7-10)

45. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 45 RESULTS : APPEAL APPLICATIONS In ex parte cases, 70% of the decisions are notified within less than 26 weeks from remittal to the Board How do you rate this performance? 1% 0% 4% 5% 11% 16% 19% 17% 7% 4% 16% 0% 3% 0% 6% 3% 19% 13% 10% 3% 39% 0 = very poor 12345678910 = excellent DONT KNOW AGENTS PROPRIETORS PROPIETORS: 45% AGENTS: 47% SATISFIED (7-10)

46. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 46 RESULTS : APPEAL APPLICATIONS In inter partes cases, 87% of the decisions are notified within less than 26 weeks from remittal to the Board How do you rate this performance? 2% 1% 0% 4% 6% 9% 20% 18% 13% 7% 4% 14% 0% 3% 6% 3% 6% 10% 23% 3% 42% 0 = very poor 12345678910 = excellent DONT KNOW AGENTS PROPRIETORS PROPIETORS: 39% AGENTS: 42% SATISFIED (7-10)

47. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 47 SUMMARY SUMMARY: APPEAL (1) In ex parte cases, 70% of the decisions are notified within less than 26 weeks from remittal to the Board In inter partes cases, 87% of the decisions are notified within less than 26 weeks from remittal to the Board SATISFIED (7-10) 47% How do you rate … 45% 42% 39% AGENTSPROPRIETORS the quality of decisions of the Boards of Appeal? 60% 45%

48. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 LEVEL 3: CORE BUSINESS/ Register CORE BUSINESS REGISTER USI (Users Satisfaction Index)

49. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 49 RESULTS RESULTS Identification of needs for action: REGISTER 51% 63% 62% 63% 71% 70% 77% 78% 0% 55% SwiftnessAccuracyQuality Every user satisfied No users satisfied AGENTS 2006 2007 2008 + 7 + 6 + 8 45% 59% 54% 61% 71% 62% 74% SwiftnessAccuracyQuality 55% (minimum) PROPRIETORS 2006 2007 2008 + 1 + 3 PROPRIETORS (No: 421) AGENTS (No: 562)

50. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 50 How important is it to you that the OHIM sets time standards to register recordals or to produce documents requested? RESULTS : REGISTER (0) Not important ------------ Very important (10) PROPIETORS: 81% AGENTS: 85% IMPORTANT (7-10) AGENTS PROPRIETORS 0% 2% 4% 5% 12% 14% 17% 41% 0% 1% 0% 1% 4% 7% 15% 14% 15% 38% 012345678910

51. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 51 RESULTS : REGISTER Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past year? More than 90% of CTM and RCD certified copies and certificates are issued within 14 days of receiving the request More than 95% of CTM and RCD transfers are recorded within 14 days of the request PROPRIETORS CANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTERCANNOT COMPAREWORSENO CHANGEBETTER AGENTSPROPRIETORSAGENTS 31% 68% 4% 1% 38% 21% 26% 10% 32% 69% 3% 0% 37% 20% 28% 11%

52. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 52 SUMMARY SUMMARY: REGISTER How important is it to you that the OHIM sets time standards to register recordals or to produce documents requested? IMPORTANT (7-10) 85% POSITIVE CHANGE 26% 28% How important is it to you… More than 90% of CTM and RCD certified copies and certificates are issued within 14 days of receiving the request More than 95% of CTM and RCD transfers are recorded within 14 days of the request 10% 11% 81% AGENTSPROPRIETORS

53. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 LEVEL 2: INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION USI (Users Satisfaction Index)

54. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 54 RESULTS_ RESULTS_INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION How satisfied are you with the following aspects related to obtaining information? 2005 2006 2007 2008 AGENTS 43% 48% 57% 61% 49% 59% 71% 60% 40% 45% 53% 62% 47% 57% 72% 62% 55% 53% 57% 66% 52% 60% 74% 65% 60% 64% 72% 63% 68% 79% 72% Ease of identifying the right person to speak to Ease of obtaining the right information Clarity of information provided by the OHIM The tendency to replace paper by e-communications (e-business) Speed of response to enquiries Accuracy of responses Mastery of the languages used in OHIM communications Completeness of information provided by the OHIM Minimum + 11 + 7 + 8 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 5

55. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 55 How satisfied are you with the following aspects related to obtaining information? RESULTS_ RESULTS_INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION Ease of identifying the right person to speak to Ease of obtaining the right information Clarity of information provided by the OHIM The tendency to replace paper by e-communications (e-business) Speed of response to enquiries Accuracy of responses Mastery of the languages used in OHIM communications Completeness of information provided by the OHIM Minimum 40% 46% 62% 47% 53% 68% 59% 37% 39% 45% 64% 46% 60% 71% 62% 49% 50% 51% 64% 55% 62% 75% 64% 55% 57% 58% 68% 62% 69% 81% 69% + 6 + 7 + 6 + 5 2005 2006 2007 2008 + 4

56. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 Results tools e-business

57. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 57 Are you aware of/have you ever visited the OHIMs website ? YES 2005 97% RESULTS RESULTS LEVEL2: OHIM´s website YES 2005 88% YES 2006 99% YES 2006 94% PROPRIETORS AGENTS YES 2007 99% YES 2007 96% YES 2008 99% YES 2008 94% Please rate OHIMs website with regard to the following aspects 53% 62% 74% 64% 58% 66% 73% 66% 56% 65% 71% 65% 57% 69% 75% 71% Clarity of the structure Completeness of the contents Usefulness of contents Speed at which the information is updated 2005 2006 2007 2008 52% 56% 64% 60% 44% 53% 60% 57% 49% 58% 63% 58% 63% 66% 60% 200520062007 2008 Minimum PROPRIETORS (Nº: 497) AGENTS (Nº: 703) 52% + 3 + 2 + 5 + 3 + 4 + 6 + 1

58. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 58 RESULTS: CTM ONLINE AGENTS 82% 12% 8% 9% 5% 7% 4% 5% 3% 5% 78% 84% 82% 200520062007 2008 Use it regularlyUse it sometimesAware but do not useNot aware Always personally 83% Always through a third party 2% Sometimes personally 15% How often do you use the service/ database….? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate CTM Online with regard to …? 77% 78% 74% 80% 78% 76% 75% 82% 76% 64% 66% 73% 83% 70% 74% 78% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes 2005 2006 2007 2008 55% (minimum) Every user satisfied No users satisfied + 5+ 8+ 6 + 7

59. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 59 68% 71% 69% 75% 65% 68% 63% 70% 64% 58% 59% 67% 75% 66% 70% 74% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes RESULTS: RCD ONLINE AGENTS How often do you use the service/ database….? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate CTM Online with regard to …? 2005 2006 2007 2008 55% (minimum) Every user satisfied 28% 34% 21% 28% 24% 17% 29% 23% 21% 10% 20% 18% 27% 30% 31% 39% 200520062007 2008 Use it regularlyUse it sometimesAware but do not useNot aware Always through a third party 5% Sometimes personally 25% Always personally 70% No users satisfied + 11 + 8 + 11 + 7

60. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 60 RESULTS: E-FILING CTM AGENTS For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate E-Filing CTM with regard to …? How often do you use the service/ database….? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? Use it regularlyUse it sometimesAware but do not useNot aware 51% 20% 17% 19% 21% 36% 25% 22% 23% 7% 5% 6% 37% 55% 53% 200520062007 2008 Always personally 70% Always through a third party 11% Sometimes personally 19% 60% 64% 59% 73% 64% 62% 54% 71% 59% 51% 53% 70% 71% 56% 59% 75% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes 2005 2006 2007 2008 55% (minimum) Every user satisfied No users satisfied + 12 + 5 + 6 + 5

61. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 61 RESULTS: E-FILING RCD AGENTS How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate E-Filing RCD with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? Always through a third party 14% Sometimes personally 21% Always personally 65% 15% 18% 47% 46% 41% 18% 12% 18% 27% 23% 20% 2006 2007 2008 Use it regularlyUse it sometimesAware but do not useNot aware 58% 57% 53% 65% 57% 47% 52% 65% 59% 48% 51% 69% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes 2006 2007 2008 55% (minimum) Every user satisfied No users satisfied

62. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 62 RESULTS: MY PAGE How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate My Page with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? Use it regularlyUse it sometimesAware but do not useNot aware 30% 9% 10% 13% 34% 31% 38% 29% 44% 32% 25% 27% 14% 27% 28% 200520062007 2008 AGENTS Always through a third party 7% Always personally 73% Sometimes personally 20% 57% 50% 58% 66% 62% 67% 64% 68% 60% 49% 55% 67% 68% 60% 66% 74% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes 55% (minimum) Every user satisfied No users satisfied 2005 2006 2007 2008 + 11+ 8 + 11 + 7

63. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 63 RESULTS: E-OPPOSITION How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate E-Opposition with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? AGENTS 15% 14% 49% 20% 21% 16% 15% 2007 2008 Use it regularlyUse it sometimesAware but do not useNot aware Always through a third party 9% Always personally 73% Sometimes personally 18% 64% 53% 61% 70% 67% 58% 60% 70% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes 55% (minimum) Every user satisfied No users satisfied 2007 2008 + 3+ 5

64. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 64 RESULTS: E-Renewal How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate E-Renewal with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? AGENTS Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes 55% (minimum) Every user satisfied No users satisfied 13% 41% 19% 27% 2008 not aware aware but do not use sometimes regularly 58% 20% Always through a third party Always personally Sometimes personally 22% 83% 78% 82% 2008

65. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 65 RESULTS: CTM ONLINE PROPRIETORS For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate CTM Online with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? Every user satisfied No users satisfied 29% 22% 19% 25% 27% 17% 14% 9% 12% 21% 32% 24% 32% 40% 42% 36% 200520062007 2008 Use it regularlyUse it sometimesAware but do not useNot aware Always through a third party 3% Always personally 82% Sometimes personally 16% 63% 64% 71% 65% 68% 67% 71% 65% 63% 64% 68% 70% 68% 73% 75% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes 55% (minimum) 2005 2006 2007 2008 How often do you use the service/ database….? + 5 + 9 + 7

66. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 66 RESULTS: RCD ONLINE How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate RCD Online with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? PROPRIETORS 5% 34% 9% 18% 15% 21% 23% 21% 28% 59% 51% 59% 23% 8% 11% 2005200620072008 Use it regularlyUse it sometimes Aware but do not use Not aware Always through a third party 12% Always personally 67% Sometimes personally 21% 54% 53% 55% 59% 64% 63% 61% 63% 62% 64% 65% 70% 69% 76% 82% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes Every user satisfied No users satisfied 55% (minimum) 2005 2006 2007 2008 + 8 + 7 + 12 + 17

67. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 67 RESULTS: E-FILING CTM How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate E-Filing CTM with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? 15% 29% 25% 36% 33% 31% 25% 19% 20% 21% 29% 21% 32% 19% 24% 22% 200520062007 2008 Use it regularlyUse it sometimes Aware but do not use Not aware PROPRIETORS Always through a third party 4% Always personally 81% Sometimes personally 14% 65% 63% 68% 63% 62% 60% 69% 60% 59% 58% 68% 67% 70% 79% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes Every user satisfied No users satisfied 55% (minimum) 2005 2006 2007 2008 + 8 + 12 + 11

68. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 68 RESULTS: E-FILING RCD PROPRIETORS How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate E-Filing RCD with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? 8% 17% 13% 31% 29% 53% 43% 54% 8% 4% 9% 200620072008 Use it regularlyUse it sometimes Aware but do not use Not aware Always through a third party 8% Always personally 72% Sometimes personally 20% Every user satisfied No users satisfied 55% (minimum) 2006 2007 2008 58% 57% 53% 67% 61% 56% 69% 67% 63% 68% 78% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes + 6+ 7+ 12 + 9

69. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 69 RESULTS: MY PAGE How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate My Page with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? Use it regularlyUse it sometimes Aware but do not use Not aware 8% 10% 9% 11% 10% 24% 19% 26% 24% 61% 64% 50% 58% 5%13% 7% 200520062007 2008 Always through a third party 4% Always personally 82% Sometimes personally 15% Every user satisfied No users satisfied 55% (minimum) 2005 2006 2007 2008 63% 68% 60% 74% 64% 63% 66% 76% 54% 55% 54% 61% 63%62% 66% 74% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes PROPRIETORS + 9+ 7+ 12 + 13

70. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 70 RESULTS E-OPPOSITION How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate E-Opposition with regard to …? Do you deal with these services personally or through a third party? PROPRIETORS 9% 5% 35% 33% 52% 59% 5% 3% 2007 2008 Use it regularlyUse it sometimes Aware but do not use Not aware Always through a third party 8% Always personally 70% Sometimes personally 22% 67% 58% 57% 76% 73% 68% 73% 86% Ease of use of the systemSpeed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes Every user satisfied No users satisfied 55% (minimum) 2007 2008 + 6+ 10+ 6 + 10

71. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 71 RESULTS E-Renewal How often do you use the service/ database….? For Users regularly + sometimes: How would you evaluate e-Renewal service with regard to the following? Do you use e-Renewal....? PROPRIETORS Use it regularlyUse it sometimes Aware but do not use Not aware Every user satisfied No users satisfied 55% (minimum) 2008 6% 33% 57% 4% 2008 4% Always through a third party 8% Always personally 64% Sometimes personally 28% 84% 76% 81% Ease of use of the system Speed of the systemReliability of the systemSecurity and confidentiality of processes

72. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 72 SUMMARY: E – BUSINESS % USE (REGULARLY + SOMETIMES AGENTS E-OPPOSITION 29% 67 ( 3) 58 ( 5) 60 ( 1) 70 (=) SATISFIED (%) SECURITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROCESSES RELIABILITY OF SYSTEM SPEED OF THE SYSTEM EASE OF USE OF THE SYSTEM RCD-ONLINE 53% 75 ( 11) 66 ( 8) 70 ( 11) 74 ( 7) CTM-ONLINE 91% 83 ( 7) 70 ( 6) 74 ( 8) 78 ( 5) E-FILING CTM 71% 71 ( 12) 56 ( 5) 59 ( 6) 75 ( 5) E-FILING RCD 41% 59 ( 2) 48 ( 1) 51 ( 1) 69 ( 4) MYPAGE 44% 68 ( 8) 60 ( 11) 66 ( 11) 74 ( 7) E-RENEWAL 40% 8378 82

73. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 73 SUMMARY: E – BUSINESS E-OPPOSITION 8% 73 ( 6) 68 ( 10) 73 ( 16) 86 ( 10) SATISFIED (%) SECURITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROCESSES RELIABILITY OF SYSTEM SPEED OF THE SYSTEM EASE OF USE OF THE SYSTEM RCD-ONLINE 20% 70 ( 8) 69 ( 7) 76 ( 12) 82 ( 17) CTM-ONLINE 56% 70 ( 5) 68 ( 5) 73 ( 9) 75 ( 7) E-FILING CTM 48% 68 ( 8) 67 ( 8) 70 ( 12) 79 ( 11) E-FILING RCD 17% 67 ( 6) 63 ( 7) 68 ( 12) 78 ( 9) MYPAGE 18% 63 ( 9) 62 ( 7) 66 ( 12) 74 ( 13) E-RENEWAL 10% 8378 82 PROPIETORS % USE (REGULARLY + SOMETIMES)

74. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 74 How does the CTM Online system performance compare with the 2007 version? How does the RCD-ONLINE system performance compare with 2007? AGENTS PROPRIETORS RESULTS RESULTS: e-business 28% 1% 0% 1% 3% 11% 16% 12% 8% 59% 0% 2% 3% 8% 6% 7% 6% Dont know 0 = a lot worse 12345678910 = much better 47% 1% 0% 1% 7% 9% 8% 6% 5% 4% 74% 0% 1% 3% 2% 3% Dont know 0 = a lot worse 12345678910 = much better PROPIETORS: 27% AGENTS: 44% BETTER (7-10) PROPIETORS: 11% AGENTS: 23% BETTER (7-10)

75. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 75 How does RCD e-filing perform compared with 2007? In 2008, the OHIM made improvements to and/or launched new releases of CTM e-filing RCD e-filing and e-opposition How does CTM e-filing perform compared with 2007? AGENTS PROPRIETORS RESULTS RESULTS: e-business How does e-opposition perform compared with 2007? Have you noticed worse/better performance for searches/e-filing through MYPAGE? 44% 1% 0% 1% 2% 9% 8% 11% 7% 6% 72% 0% 3% 5% 6% 3% 5% Dont know 0 = a lot worse 12345678910 = much better 60% 1% 0% 1% 7% 5% 6% 4% 78% 0% 1% 0% 1% 2% 3% 1% 4% Dont know 0 = a lot worse 12345678910 = much better 67% 1% 0% 4% 5% 4% 3% 83% 0% 1% 2% Dont know 0 = a lot worse 12345678910 = much better PROPIETORS: 20% AGENTS: 34% BETTER (7-10) PROPIETORS: 11% AGENTS: 19% BETTER (7-10) PROPIETORS: 8% AGENTS: 16% BETTER (7-10) 57% 74% 34% 16% 8% 9% 1% 2% AGENTSPROPRIETORS Dont knowWORSENO CHANGEBETTER

76. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 Results questions Other

77. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 77 RESULTS: Simplicity of the fees system, Handling of fees and Handling of OHIM current accounts Every user satisfied No users satisfied 67% 68% 69% 74% 69% 68% 67% 65% 70% 0% Simplicity of the fees system Handling of fees in general Handling of OHIM current accounts 51% 50% 55% 42% 49% 52% 48% 53% 56% 48% 57% Simplicity of the fees system Handling of fees in general Handling of OHIM current accounts 55% (minimum) + 6 2005 2006 2007 2008 AGENTS PROPRIETORS 2005 2006 2007 2008 PROPRIETORS (No:)TOTAL AGENTS (No:) + 1 + 4 + 2 + 1

78. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 78 RESULTS RESULTS PERCEIVED EVOLUTION OF THE OHIM Generally speaking, do you feel that the OHIM has performed better than, the same as or worse than last year? AGENTS PROPRIETORS 2007 36% 43% 18% 4% 34% 24% 41% 1% The same Better Dont know Worse The same Better Dont know Worse TOTAL AGENTS (No: 913) TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 685) 2007 The same 40% 20% Dont know 4% Worse 35% Better 18% The same 18% Better 2% Worse 62% Dont know 2008

79. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 Conclusions

80. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 80 CONCLUSIONS IDENTIFICATION OF THE NEEDS FOR ACTION As a summary of everything presented here, main conclusions drawn from the research are: A significant increase in the overall satisfaction of both types of users (agents and proprietors) A decrease in the distance between the Propietors evaluacions and the Agents evaluations. Significant improvements in satisfaction in all the areas of the core business, in both groups of users. Improvement in the more negative perception of last year: accessibility of Office employees. A general increase in the satisfaction with e-business tools, in both groups of users. An overall perception of improvement in the functioning of the OHIM compared to one year ago.

81. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 Results by country ANNEX I

82. 82 GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 RESULTS BY COUNTRY Generally, and Taking into account all the aspects covered by the questionnaire, what is your overall level of satisfaction with the OHIM as a whole? 55% (minimum) Every user satisfied No users satisfied nº = 290nº = 95nº = 80nº = 87nº = 92AGENTS nº = 107nº = 56nº = 116nº = 83nº = 70PROPRIETORS On the whole, how would you evaluate THE OHIMS OVERALL IMAGE? 55% (minimum) 83% 79% 63% 86% 78% 73% 70%69% 83% DEESFRGBIT Every user satisfied No users satisfied 73% 70% 78% 40% 87% 69% 65% 61% 70% DEESFRGBIT

83. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 83 Overall, how would you evaluate the OHIMS MEANS OF COMMUNICATION WITH AND PROVIDING INFORMATION for its users? 55% (minimum) Taking into account all aspects, what is your overall level of satisfaction with the OHIM's performance in dealing with COMMUNITY TRADE MARKS? RESULTS BY COUNTRY 66% 74% 72% 45% 77% 69% 67% 65% 63% 72% DEESFRGBIT 78% 76% 80% 62% 85% 71% 64% 66% 79% DEESFRGBIT No users satisfied Every user satisfied No users satisfied Every user satisfied nº = 290nº = 95nº = 80nº = 87nº = 92AGENTS nº = 107nº = 56nº = 116nº = 83nº = 70PROPRIETORS nº = 283nº = 92nº = 77 nº = 86AGENTS nº = 96nº = 51nº = 97nº = 62nº = 65PROPRIETORS 55% (minimum)

84. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 84 How would you evaluate the OHIMs …. in the issue of documents such as licences, transfers, copies and certificates? No users satisfied Every user satisfied No users satisfied Every user satisfied No users satisfied swiftness accuracy quality RESULTS BY COUNTRY 72% 70% 62% 85% 72% 64% 54% 60% 67% DEESFRGBIT 77% 80% 67% 87% 85% 74% 67% 78% DEESFRGBIT 78% 77% 74% 62% 87% 85% 84% 67% 75% 78% DEESFRGBIT 55% (minimum) 55% (minimum) 55% (minimum) nº = 133nº = 69nº = 51nº = 65nº = 62AGENTS nº = 51 nº = 36 nº = 72 nº = 57 nº = 38 PROPRIETORS

85. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 Methodology ANNEX II

86. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 86 As explained in the Preliminary report for implementing the survey 2005, the methodology applied was directed at the construction of two different types of information: The User Satisfaction Index: USI METHODOLOGY BASIC INDICATORS between different types of user Over time Identification of STRENGTHS and WEAKNESSES Purpose: COMPARISON Purpose: DIAGNOSIS To establish priorities for the ACTION NEEDS in each of the various areas of service.

87. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 87 The User Satisfaction Index (USI) is a synthetic indicator of satisfaction built from the evaluations obtained in the various areas of action making up the service offered by the OHIM to its users. The USI takes into account: the evaluation obtained for each attribute. the influence (importance) of each attribute in the satisfaction. the percentage of users affected by that attribute. using statistical correlation analysis since not all users access the same OHIM services (for example, Trade Mark Applications and Appeals) METHODOLOGY Basic indicators: USI The analysis was conducted in ladder form, constructing each higher step from the lower steps and following the scheme set out in the following diagram:

88. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 88 METHODOLOGY CONSTRUCTION OF THE USERS SATISFACTION MODEL USI (Users Satisfaction Index) OHIM IMAGE INFO. & COMMUNIC. COMPLAINTS LEVEL 1 CORE BUSINESS LEVEL 2 APPEAL REGISTER CTMRCD OVERALL IMAGE FILED COMPLAINTS LEVEL 3 OPPOSI- TIONS INVALI- DITY STAFF INVALI- DITY STAFF APPLICA- TIONS

89. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 89 The model is based on the construction of a strategic matrix where it is related the satisfaction with each aspect (TOP BOX) with the influence over the overall evaluation. Dont know 0102030405060708090100 TOP BOX % SATISFIED USERS WHY THE TOP BOX AND NOT THE AVERAGE? The average is seen as highly influenced by the high and low points, and experience shows that, consequently, it hides the reality. 20,0%30,0%40,0% 50,0%60,0%70,0%80,0%90,0% INFLUENCE SATISFACTION (TOP BOX) METHODOLOGY Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses (I) WHAT IS THE TOP BOX? It is the percentage of SATISFIED USERS, understood as those who give an evaluation (of the aspect in question) situated in any of the four top positions on the scale. Correlation with global satisfaction

90. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 90 IMAGE 20,0%30,0%40,0% 50,0%60,0%70,0%80,0%90,0% To improve (priority) Quadrant A: Strategic disadvantages To maintain Quadrant B: Strategic advantages To watch Quadrant C: Advantages with lower strategic utility To consider (secondary) Quadrant D: Acceptable disadvantages INFLUENCE SATISFACTION METHODOLOGY Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses (II) HOW TO READ STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES GRAPHS Very important and poorly valued aspects Very important and highly valued aspects Less important and poorly valued aspects Less important and highly valued aspects

91. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 91 DESIRABLE: 65% o más METHODOLOGY Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses (III) Another important aspect to be defined is the point at which the axis should be cut and, as a result, where the STRENGTHS and WEAKNESSES quadrants should be set. AXIS OF INFLUENCE (vertical): by definition, and given that this is a relative measurement which is only intended to be arranged hierarchically, this was cut at the mid-point. AXIS OF SATISFACTION (horizontal): the question to be answered is Above what percentage of users satisfied with one aspect can this be regarded as a STRENGTH? As there were no previous comparable experiences, in this study the acceptable minimum was applied as 55% of users, although we recommend trying to improve this figure in future exercises. 20%30%40% 50%60% INFLUENCE 0%10% 55% SATISFACTION EXCELENCE: 85% o más 70%80%90%100% MINIMUM: 55% users satisfied OHIM USER SATISFACTION STUDY

92. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 92 METHODOLOGY Identification of Strengths and Weaknesses (IV) Finally, when interpreting the STRENGTHS and WEAKNESSES diagrams, the following must be taken into account: SIZE OF THE POINTS REPRESENTED: Point size reflects the VOLUME of users affected by each aspect INFLUENCE SATISFACTION + + - - 55% STRATEGIC DISADVANTAGES ACCEPTABLE DISADVANTAGES STRATEGIC ADVANTAGES WITH LOWER STRATEGIC UTILITY APPEAL RCD REGISTER CTM 20% 30%40%50%60% 80% 90% In those diagrams were all points are de same size, this will mean that the aspects measured affect the same number of users. THE NUMBER No: : represents the sample (No. of responses) from which information was obtained. TOTAL AGENTS (No: 714)

93. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 93 Survey results show that both evaluation criteria and satisfaction levels with OHIM differ when evaluated by proprietors or by agents. Therefore, their opinions have been analysed separately: the summary analysis of TOTAL USERS would only lead to confusion as it does not represent any of them. The first conclusion of the 2005 analysis was that it makes no sense to talk about the TOTAL NUMBER OF USERS: For this reason, all the results of the report are presented separately for each group. METHODOLOGY ¿TOTAL USUERS?

94. GfK Emer Ad Hoc Research OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2008 Febrero 2009 Responsable del Proyecto e Informe en GfK Emer Ad-Hoc Research: Ángeles Bacete; e-mail: angeles.bacete@gfk-emer.com