Tag >> Trademarks
Posted by: Ventsi Ventsi in wireless, WIPO, well-known marks, Well Known Marks India, Well Known Marks, Trademarks, Trademark use in India, trademark search, trademark registration, Trademark patent news, trademark, Trade Marks, Trade Mark, Maintenance Fees, Madrid Protocol USPTO Trademarks, licensing, Lawsuits, law on
Aug 19, 2010
The Finland Patent Office refused to register the mark NEW WAVE for Class 25 on the ground that this phrase is often used to describe something different from traditional, so that mark was descriptive of the type, quality and use of goods for which it relates.
The proprietor appealed that decision.
According to the Appeal Board the word WAVE is not used by the average consumer in respect of goods in class 25. Board believes that this phrase is used primarily in the music industry and politics but it has no any particular significance to the case of goods such as clothes and shoes. Therefore this trademark can be defined as suggestive and distinctive for goods in Class 25.
Intellectual Property Planet
Posted by: Ventsi Ventsi in Well Known Marks India, Well Known Marks, Trademarks, Trademark use in India, trademark registration, Trademark patent news, trademark, Trade Marks, Trade Mark, ThreeDimensional trademarks on
May 17, 2010
The Second Board of Appeal of the OHIM ruling on appeals against refusal of registration of Soviet symbols such as an European mark.
Couture Tech Ltd filed an application for that mark for Classes 3, 14, 18, 23, 26 and 43. OHIM refused the mark because of the mark contrary to generally accepted norms and ethics especially in countries like Hungary, Latvia, Czech Republic. There, these symbols are banned from use because they symbolize tyranny and totalitarian government, of which these countries have been affected in the past.......Full text.
Posted by: Ventsi Ventsi in WIPO, well-known marks, Well Known Marks India, Well Known Marks, United Kingdom, Trademarks, Trademark use in India, trademark search, trademark registration, Trademark patent news, trademark, Trade Marks, Trade Mark, maintenance of trademarks, Madrid Protocol USPTO Trademarks, law, IP litigation, IP day on
Apr 19, 2010
Guardian, reported the news that the name of the famous football coach JOSE MOURINHO is a registered trademark owned by Chelsea football club.
Currently José Mourinho is the coach of Inter Milan but in 2007 when he was working in Chelsea, gives written permission to the football club for two registration of marks for both his name and for his signature.
International marks can be found here and here.
Besides them, and Chelsea has two European marks for name and signature of José Mourinho, they can be found here and here.
Each mark is registered for various goods as jewelry, sportswear, cosmetics and so on. ............. Full text can be find here
Posted by: Arturo Reyes in Trademarks, trademark registration, trademark, Trade Marks, Trade Mark, Reyes Fenig, renewal of trademarks, prosecution, Mexico, maintenance of trademarks, law, faster, examination, enforceability, class, Application on
Mar 30, 2010
An amendment to the Industrial Property Statute published on January 2010, and to the guidelines of the Mexican Patent and Trademark Office (MPTO) for the filing of new trademark applications will make the trademark filing process less formal than it used to be. Mexican law was already quite liberal, when compared with most Latin American countries, regarding the formal requirements for power of attorney documents for trademark and patent filing, prosecution and maintenance. Mexican law does not demand notarization, consular legalization or Apostille on such documents. Now, the law is going a little further. The MPTO will no longer request a power of attorney document in most trademark filing cases. Instead, the MPTO will consider that the agent is authorized to file the trademark
The 35th Federal Court issued a decision on the case between the Brazilian company LG Informática Ltd and a global manufacturer LG.
According to court LG Informática Ltd use the name commercially earlier than registered marks owned by LG Electronics Group in Brazil. Therefore, the court considers that these marks should be cancelled in their part of computers and computer equipment in class 9. Moreover, 5 new LG's applications for trade mark should be rejected by the Patent Office in the country in respect of those goods. For other classes, the court allowed the registration of marks.
Most likely, this decision will be appealed because it is seriously affecting the interests of LG Electronics Group for goods such as computers and computer equipment, where the company is very strong.
Posted by: Arturo Reyes in well-known marks, Well Known Marks, unregistered marks, Trademarks, trademark registration, trademark, Trade Marks, Trade Mark, Reyes Fenig, Mexico, IP litigation, infringement, enforceability on
Jan 04, 2010
Mexico, as most civil-law countries, follows the first-to-file principle; it means that the first to file has priority to obtain the trademark registration, hence, to be acknowledged as proprietor of the trademark. Nevertheless, Mexico acknowledges certain rights and defenses for the users of non-registered trademarks; Mexico also allows applicants to claim a date of commencement of use in Mexico, in order to obtain some benefits after the issuance of the trademark registration. In any case, these rights and defenses should not be construed as common-law rights (there is no common-law in Mexico) or exceptions to the first-to-file principle: the first applicant has priority to get the trademark registration, no matter who claimed the earliest date of first use or if the earliest applicant
Posted by: Arturo Reyes in Trademarks, trademark registration, trademark, Trade Marks, Trade Mark, Reyes Fenig, Mexico, licensing, Lawsuits, law, IP litigation, INTA, appeal on
Nov 06, 2009
The INTA Bulletin of July 209 (Vol. 64 No. 12) informed that the International Trademark Association (INTA) filed an amicus brief with the Specialized Chamber in Intellectual Property of the Federal Court of Tax and Administrative Affairs (FCTAA), in connection with an appeal filed against the Mexican Patent and Trademark Office (MPTO). According to the bulletin, the basic purpose of the amicus brief was to persuade the FCTAA to "reverse the decision rendered by IMPI (the Spanish acronym for the MPTO) and to interpret the law to provide Mexican trademark owners with the right to seek cancellation of a registration on the ground of bad faith, a right currently enjoyed by foreign trademark owners." Of course, as a Mexican lawyer, it was interesting to learn that INTA was involved in a Mexican
Originally published at Russian Patents blog Back in August 2009 we introduced an optional service – free trademark search in Russia. My opinion on what free search is good for is known and well worded directly at the page we offer the service at. Since August we received only one inquiry for free search in Russian trademarks (as compared to tens of inquiries for regular Russian trademark search) – and results of the free search only cemented my opinion that free trademark search in Russia being total and complete waste of time and totally misleading. Here is the story – rather short, and structured in the table for your convinience. | | Client: | Patents from RU: | | 1 | My employer has asked me to determine whether we will be able to trademark our company & product name, OurCompanyProduct, |
The Mexican statutes do not stipulate any provision regarding trademark coexistence agreements and letters of consent. Nevertheless, these instruments have been widely used to prevent or overcome objections from the Mexican Patent and Trademark Office (MPTO) associated to applications for trademarks identical or confusingly similar to earlier registered or applied ones, protecting the same or similar products or services. The Industrial Property Law provides that the MPTO will reject a trademark application when the trademark is identical or confusingly similar to an earlier registered or applied one, to cover the same or similar goods or services. Owners of existing registrations are allowed to apply for the registration of an identical trademark to protect goods/services similar to those
The renewal of trademark registrations is an important aspect of the maintenance of any IP portfolio. Making the right decision about renewing (or not renewing) a trademark allows the proprietor to maximize the value of its trademarks, or cut unnecessary expenses. In this post, I am explaining the basic aspects about renewing trademarks in Mexico, calling the reader's attention to two issues that should be carefully considered when the trademark owner decides to renew a trademark registration in our country. The basics about trademark renewal in Mexico A Mexican trademark registration is valid for a ten years term, counted from the filing date in Mexico, regardless the priority, registration or first-use date. The registration may be renewed an unlimited number of times for ten years
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 Next > End >> |
|
|
|
 |
Partners |
 |
|
.jpg)
.jpg)
