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

Comment (2) Read More...

British Brands Group and the Anti-Counterfeiting Group issued a manifesto concerning trademarks and their power.
Manifesto aims to explain the contribution of brands in creating and maintaining economic prosperity, preserving jobs and improving competitiveness in the UK.
Advice to be given in the Manifesto concerning the following:

Full text on Intellectual property planet

Comment (2) Read More...

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

Comment (6) Read More...

Nestle put opposition to an application for a new mark "Golden Eagle" below, which contains a red cup.
First OHIM then Board of Appeal held that there is no similarity between the two marks.
The European Court considers that between the two marks are present similarity in the extent of consumer confusion.
The arguments are:

Full text on Intellectual property planet

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

Comment (8) Read More...

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.

Comment (5) Read More...

Duncanbucknell.com reported for available database with court decisions on intellectual property in China.
The database provides information on the outcome of court cases, what were the decisions of the court, what was the compensation and so on.
Database that has a version in English can be found here.

Intellectual Property Planet

Comment (3) Read More...

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

Comment (8) Read More...

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

Comment (15) Read More...