Every day, the intellectual property assets of businesses increase their importance. They are not, and should not, seen any longer as a by-product, but as a fundamental asset for the survival, well-being and prosperity of businesses.

Employees and their activity are a very important source of intangible assets, so adopting a clear, well supported and fair policy in connection to the intellectual property generated by employees should be considered as strategic in any innovative business. Further, an inadequate intellectual property policy inside a business organization may lead to potential liability issues and reduce the value of the company.

Mexican copyright and patent law are similar to the laws of other jurisdictions concerning the exclusivity rights stipulated for the

Comment (0) Read More...

There are two frequent questions I receive from foreign colleagues and Mexican businessmen regarding maintenance of Mexican trademark registrations.

One is if it is required to file evidence of use of a trademark with the Mexican Patent and Trademark Office (MPTO) from time to time in order to keep a trademark registration alive. The answer is ‘no'.

The other question is: If it is not required by the statute, why some Mexican trademark lawyers insist in this filing every three years?

Since 1991 it is not necessary to file statements or evidence of use of a trademark with the MPTO in order to keep a trademark registration in force. It does not mean, however, that stopping using a registered trademark would not have negative consequences. If the use of a registered trademark is interrupted

Comment (0) Read More...

Section 221 Bis of the Mexican Industrial Property Law (IPL) provides that the owner of a patent or registered trademark (there are no common-law rights in Mexico) is entitled to claim from the infringer as damages and/or lost of profits at least 40% of the retail price of each infringing product sold by the defendant. The reason of such stipulation is not only to provide monetary relief to the right holder but also to punish the infringer.

Further, section 221 of the IPL states that the right to file a damages claim is independent from the administrative penalties that the Mexican Patent and Trademark Office (MPTO) may impose to the infringer of the corresponding patent or registered trademark.

For some years, the federal courts of appeals ruled that sections 221 and 221 Bis of the IPL

Comment (0) Read More...

After a battle of two years, eBay, the online auction site, lost in a French trade mark case and has been ordered by the Paris Commercial Court to pay 40 million Euros to Louis Vuitton Moët Hennessy (the LVMH group).

The LVMH group claimed that eBay had damaged the LVMH reputation by selling counterfeit products in its website. The court accepted their claim and pointed out that not being able to keep counterfeit goods off its site indicate that eBay has 'serious faults' in the way it runs the site.

Another argument which was also accepted by the court and claimed by the LVMH group related to perfumes eBay sells on its site.

The LVMH group claimed that even the sell of authentic goods on the site should not be allowed, as selling  genuine goods harm and infringe LVMH's exclusive

Comment (0) Read More...

"Local" VERSACE registrations removed from Israeli Trade Mark Register

In a recent decision dated 29 June 2008, the Israeli Intellectual Property Adjudicator ordered the removal from the register of five registrations in respect of the trade mark Versace in various forms including Hebrew versions of the mark. The registrations were almost 20 years old.

The Israeli proprietor of the removed registrations, Versace 83 Ltd. owned by the Zadik Fur Bros., obtained the registrations at the time after the well known Italian fashion house Gianni Versace S.p.A. withdrew its oppositions. Since 2000, following the expansion of the Israeli "VERSACE" chain and the opening of many branches in prime locations, Gianni Versace S.p.A. took various actions in order to stop the commercial use of the mark and

Comment (0) Read More...

This post has nothing to do with IP. It has to do a little bit with innovation. 

The Israel Parliament ("the knesset") held a special gathering addressing the recently published "Vinograd committee" report. This report found Prime Minister Olmert's conduct during the "Second Lebanon War" one of the reasons for what the committee defined as a "failure to overcome a small guerilla organization".

After Prime Minister Olmert, who is considered a true political surviver (not surprisingly) refused to resign after the report was published, the head of opposition, Bibi Netanyahu, former Israeli prime minister, discribed, in a rather innovative matter, Olmert's speech as "a speech of a lawyer, not

Comment (0) Read More...