This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
We are pleased to bring you a guest post by Tahhira Somal, exploring existing frameworks of non-conventional trademarks, particularly those of smell marks, and assessing their role in the protection of certain traditional cultural expressions. One type of such non-traditional trademarks is a smell or scent mark. Image from here.
As the debate heated up, the European Union (EU) stepped in and eventually decided to favour the Swiss in 2001. Interestingly, another battle regarding the Gruyère trademark is happening in North America. However, the fate of the Gruyère trademark in Canada is still up in the air. However, SCU did not give up.
INTRODUCTION Section 29 [1] of the Trademark Act, 1999 , defines infringement as: “Trademarks infringement occurs if an unauthorized party makes use of a registered trademark in a way that is likely to lead to confusion about the origin of the product.” FAMOUS CASES OF TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT 1.Foreign
With so many IPs available trademarks, patents, copyrights, and more – how can you choose the right one for your work, product, or business? Trademarks are governed by the Trade Marks Act, 1999 in India. Key Features: Registration of PV is mandatory under the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Rights Act, 2001.
There are various important judgments, some stated below citing the role of deceptive similarity in infringement of trademarks in India. In this particular case, the most important issue lies within the major concept of deceptive similarity which has been discussed within the Trademarks Act, 1999. Concept of Deceptive Similarity.
A short history of copyright harmonization in the EU Since the signing of the Treaty of Rome in 1957, the process of European integration has been linked to the creation of an internal market, where a number of basic freedoms – including freedom of movement of goods and services – would be guaranteed.
The global pharmaceutical industry is responsible for the research, development, production, and marketing of medicines and t oday it is booming. As of 20 20 , the total global pharmaceutical market was valued at about $ 1. Market value is expected to exceed $2.1 trillion by 202 7.
The encouragement towards innovation is legalized under Intellectual copyrights patents and trademarks Rights are provided by the states around the globe. Unlike patents, trademark protection is held indefinitely. 483 (2001) ). Introduction: Appreciating art, culture, and innovation is a prevalent practice for ages.
On May 09, 2022 , the Delhi High Court protected the title of the iconic Bollywood movie “ Sholay ” from trademark infringement and passing-off by a U.S. The lawsuit was filed in 2001 when the defendants were found to have registered the domain name ‘www.sholay.com’ for its website. Can movie titles be protected as trademarks in India?
In the spring and summer of 2022, following the international sanctions imposed upon Russia after its invasion of Ukraine, Russia introduced several landmark changes to its IP law, most notably to patent, trademark and copyright laws. for protection of its trademark “L.O.L. Thus, in April 2022, deciding on a case brought by a U.S.
As the number of companies are increasing in the domestic and international markets the importance of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) is also increasing. Metaverse is essentially a blessing for businesses that own trademarks because it offers a fruitful environment for inexpensively promoting and marketingtrademarks.
There, future harmonization initiatives appeared already anchored not only to an internal market-building rationale, but also to the objective of ensuring the now European Union’s overall competitiveness vis-à-vis third countries and the need to strike a fair balance between the rights and interests of different parties.
Trademarks displayed in audiovisual works can be a real headache if the associated legal aspects fail to be taken into account. Both Spanish and European trademark laws and case law have shed some light in this regard. It is common practice in the audiovisual world to be particularly careful with any trademarks displayed on screen.
The trademark of Coca-Cola is its most valuable asset. The value of the Coca- Cola trademark has increased from USD 68.9 billion in 2001 to USD 120 billion now. Trademarks A trademark is a recognisable, non-functional indication that a company uses to set its products apart from those of its rivals.
There are various important judgments, some stated below citing the role of deceptive similarity in the infringement of trademarks in India. This dives into the necessary and impetus role of the intellectual property laws to protect the business and goodwill of companies being subject to trademark infringement left, right and centre.
A judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) clarifies the scope of third-party use of trademarks, taking into account the changes introduced in the European Directive on trademarks. regarding the use of the ZARA trademark. The Commercial Court No.
Legal arrangements concerning a system of fees compensating creators, holders of related rights and their successors for permitted personal uses based on the provisions of Article 5(2)(b) of Directive 2001/29 have functioned unchanged in Polish law since 1994. b) entitled CMOs in a proportion determined by the provisions of the Act.
Intellectual Propriety (IP) rights holders are under the perpetual threat of counterfeit goods in the market that is growing exponentially with advancing technology and a surge in cross-border trade among countries. Images of genuine goods (for trademarks and designs). Images of infringing goods (if applicable/available).
Introduction The Respondents were sued by the Appellant, the owner and holder of the trademark “RENAISSANCE,” seeking a permanent injunction against the use of the allegedly infringing trademark “SAI RENAISSANCE” and any other marks that are confusingly similar to the Respondents’ mark, “RENAISSANCE.”
Kat friend Marcel Pemsel, who will shortly publish as a full-fledged Guest Kat, already shares his thoughts on a recent trademark decision by the General Court concerning that favorite of trade mark questions: what does the specification of goods and services cover? 1 of Directive 2001/83/EC ) and ‘food supplements’ ( Art.
This principle was firmly established by the Supreme Court of India in the landmark decision of Cadila Health Care Limited vs. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Limited (2001). They attempt to leverage the trademarks of established drugs, creating names for inferior or unrelated products that mimic those of reputable brands.
Background In 2010, Buongiorno Myalert SA (Buongiorno), an Italian mobile apps and services provider, launched an advertising campaign for a paid subscription to a multimedia messaging service, marketed under the name ‘Club Blinko’.
9, 2024) The parties compete in the sale of “chemical bonding products marketed for home and automotive use.” The first one’s the potential surprise, and raises evidentiary questions about hearsay that a court in a trademark case might have seen differently. This wasn’t comparative advertising (or a two-player market).
Case Summaries Delhi High Court grants a permanent injunction to Allied Blenders in a trademark infringement case concerning ‘Officers Choice’ Image from here Allied Blenders and Distillers Pvt. The plaintiff, registered proprietor of ‘Vasundhra’, claimed prior use since 1999, whereas the defendant, claimed use since 2001.
Trademarks provide an advantage to businesses by distinguishing one’s product from others. In this industry, the trademarks not only play a crucial role in distinguishing the marks but also ensures consumer safety. This has led to a significant number of deceptively similar marks in the market. vs. Cadia Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
29, 2021) This is part of a long-running trademark case, now over 10 years old. During this period, defendants continued to grow and develop their inventory and marketed “Sturgis” and “Sturgis Motor Classic” rally products. Sturgis Motorcycle Rally, Inc. Rushmore Photo & Gifts, Inc., 2021 WL 1176242, No. 11-5052-JLV (D.S.D.
Chetanbhai Shah & Ors (2001 case) and held that where a case of prima facie passing off is made out, the Court ought to grant an immediate ex-parte injunction. But the facts pertaining to its market share indicate that the mark has achieved distinctiveness. The Trademark Reporter, Vol. 5 September-October, 2000].”
Some forms of data are protected by copyright, trademark, or another cognizable forms of intellectual property. From 2001 to 2017, the simplistic answer was yes, any form of revocation of authorization was typically sufficient to trigger CFAA liability, if the scraper continued to access the site without permission. .
The patentee can use the invention as an essential asset, either by licencing the use of the patent to others in return for the royalties or by selling it off to another person This way it can be a remarkable flow of revenue, mostly for the inventions with huge market value.
Mountain Valley Springs, the plaintiff, has been marketing its products under the trademark (TM) “Forest Essentials” since 2000, claiming extensive reputation and goodwill, especially for their Ayurvedic products, including a baby care segment launched in 2006. Case Overview: What were The Parties even Fighting for?
In that case, Google was using the plaintiff’s (Bharatmatrimony) trademark for advertising the websites of other matrimonial sites. Hence, the court held by virtue of Section 29(3) of the Trademark Act, there will be a presumption of infringement against the defendant. This is because there were several factual questions in dispute.
PART 1: of the blog discussed about history, development, fundamentals of IPR and explained Patents and Trademarks. Just like trademarks, registration for them is not mandatory, but if it is registered the protection becomes airtight. The blog is divided into two parts and this is part 2 of the blog. Sound recordings”.
1) He made this request on grounds including trademark law and unfair competition law. The third defendant was licensed to produce and market the disputed foods and spices under its own name and at its own expense, paying a fixed fee to the plaintiff for each individual product sold. dishes and seasonings) as works of IP. (1)
5(3)(k) of Directive 2001/29/EC “ (discussed here ); the essential characteristics of parody are the following: A parody must evoke an existing work. The Copyright / Trademark Interface: How the Expansion of Trademark Protection Is Stifling Cultural Creativity. The parody defence. by Tito Rendas. € by Martin Senftleben. €
4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 ) was that doing so would undermine the copyright protection of the standards at issue. The Copyright / Trademark Interface: How the Expansion of Trademark Protection Is Stifling Cultural Creativity. In this case, Public.Resource.Org, Inc. by Tito Rendas. € by Martin Senftleben. €
A Case of Reverse Passing Off: DHC Rules In Favour Of Western Digital On Trademark Infringement Recently, the DHC passed an ex-parte interim injunction order against Geonix, holding them prima facie liable for indulging in ‘reverse passing off’ by selling Western Digital’s hard disks as their own.
It further expanded its domain as a manufacturer by establishing a market for its self-made products such as kindle for e-book services, audiobook and ‘cloud computing’ web storage services. LEXIS 18660 & 2001 U.S. 7] Amazon Patent and Trademark Infringement, Smith & Hopen (2020), [link] (last visited Dec 8, 2022). [8]
Introduction The Indian fashion market is pegged at an impressive value of $50 billion, out of which 10% consists of international luxury brands. [1] These are the Copyright Act, 1957; Designs Act, 2000; The Geographical Indication Act of Goods Act, 1999; and the Trademark Act, 1999. 1), available at https :// euipo.europa.eu/tunnel-web/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/contentPdfs/law_and_practice/cdr_legal_basis/62002_cv_en.pdf
On 4 June 202, the European Commission published its guidance on Article 17 of Directive 790/2019 on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (CDSM Directive). This is important because Article 5 of Directive 2001/29/EC (InfoSoc Directive) provides for these exceptions, but does not oblige Member States to implement them.
Celgene markets pamolidomide as a multiple myeloma drug under the brand name Pomalyst®. Mylan submitted an ANDA, seeking to market a generic version of pamolidomide. Bare allegations of cooperation and control are insufficient to state a claim against a would-be Hatch-Waxman defendant who did not sign or submit the ANDA. Case Synopsis.
The next time you would like to protect a great innovative design you expect will be a big hit on the market, you should consider obtaining a design patent. Additionally, remedies available for trade dress infringement are the same as trademark infringement. [24]. Scenario 2: Protecting Novel Designs by Patent. ” [8].
2001), the court found that: if the promise [in a contract] amounts only to a promise to refrain from reproducing, performing, distributing or displaying the work, then the contract claim is preempted. Guest Blog Post) appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. In Wrench Ltd. Taco Bell Corp. , 3d 446 (6th Cir.
Although Applicant Integra's products have been commercially successful, it failed to prove that relevant consumers perceive the "Pastel Tints" as trademarks. The Board found Integra's evidence insufficient to meet its "heavy burden" to prove that consumers recognize the use of the Pastel Tints on insert racks as trademarks.
4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 ) was that doing so would undermine the copyright protection of the standards at issue. The Copyright / Trademark Interface: How the Expansion of Trademark Protection Is Stifling Cultural Creativity. This judgment refers to a challenge brought by Public.Resource.Org, Inc. by Tito Rendas. €
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content