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
The lion’s share of cases, 84, had works that were already registered when the case was filed (Note: There are an additional three cases where the registration status is unknown). Registration Status at the Time of Filing. Of the registrations, 49 of the registrations were before 2020 and 68 were from before 2022.
Against that background, this blog post provides some tentative musings on the impact of text-to-image generators on human artistic creativity by analysing recent US and Canadian copyright registrations for artistic works. For simplicity, I will label this ‘commercial significant artistic creativity’.
Three years after the 2020 amendments to the Geographical Indication Rules, 2002 , the Ministry of Commerce and Industry (MoCI) published the 2023 draft amendments on October 20, inviting objections and suggestions from the relevant stakeholders.
IP Financing in India – Part I: Perfection of Security and (Non) Registration of Copyright Bharat Harne Image from here The 161 st Report of Rajya Sabha Parliamentary Committee on Intellectual Property observed (paragraph 11.1) Thus, registration of copyright is completely discretionary and not compulsory.
2] However, the quintessential reason for such distinction is due to a slightly elevated standard for the registration of non-traditional marks. Image Source : Shutterstock] The Trademarks Act, 1999 (‘Act’) refers exclusively to the registrability of ‘combination of colours’. [3] In this also falls the case of colour marks.
As noted by GuestKat Becky Knott in her earlier post ( here ), brand owners have been very active in protecting their brands through attempts to secure trade mark registrations in response to the rise of the Metaverse.
The case concerned the Australian trade mark registration for the words "KATIE PERRY" (No. Katy Perry is a famous American pop artist, who was born Katheryn Hudson, but adopted the stage name Katy Perry in 2002. Cancellation Katy Perry argued that the KATIE PERRY registration should be cancelled.
A Kat awaiting weekly IP updates Designs Katfriend Henning Hartwig reviewed the interpretation of Articles 6 and 14 of Regulation 6/2002 (CDR). Another eventful week in the IP world has passedheres what to keep in mind!
In it, the CJEU confirmed that an Unregistered Community Design under Regulation 6/2002 may vest in a partial design (which the CJEU defines as “a section of the ‘whole’ that is the product”). 4(2) of Regulation 6/2002 [i.e., 11(2) of Regulation 6/2002 (para. 11(2) of Regulation 6/2002 (para. 6(1) of Regulation 6/2002.
The case revolved around SAP Se (Appellant) trying to furnish new evidence according to the Trademark Rules, 2002. It started trading in India in around 1992 under the mark “SAP” and applied for trademark registration in 1999. The Appellant herein was a software entity providing business solutions for a number of industries.
This latter characteristic means that there must be differences between the new design, when viewed overall, and the designs that existed prior to the registration application. of Regulation 6/2002. of Regulation 6/2002). of Regulation 6/2002, in which the component part is necessary for maintenance, servicing or repair work.
There has been quite a bit of debate around the registrability of GUIs under industrial design law in India. While the Designs Act, 2002, recognised protection for GUIs, the Indian Patents Office has been reluctant to grant registration to GUIs. By: International Lawyers Network
It contended that the registration sought only to circumvent copyright provisions In particular, the fact that any enforcement initiatives would require the author to disclose his identity, thus waiving his preciously guarded anonymity. Finally, the Board holds that there is no requirement to use the mark prior to registration.
It contended that the registration sought only to circumvent copyright provisions In particular, the fact that any enforcement initiatives would require the author to disclose his identity, thus waiving his preciously guarded anonymity. Finally, the Board holds that there is no requirement to use the mark prior to registration.
There has been quite a bit of debate around the registrability of GUIs under industrial design law in India. While the Designs Act, 2002, recognised protection for GUIs, the Indian Patents Office has been reluctant to grant registration to GUIs. In the case of UST Global (Singapore) Pte. 1] AID No. 2 OF 2019
The process of trademark registration in Qatar is governed by the Law no. 9 of 2002 pertaining to Trademarks, Commercial Indications, Trade Names, Geographical Indications, and Industrial Designs and Models. A single application for registration may be filed for a group of marks upon payment of the prescribed fee. Examination.
Smell marks are or have been heavily debated around the world and are privy to their own set of issues in terms of registration. Internationally, the statutory requirements for the registration of non-conventional trademarks varies across jurisdictions. Issues and Barriers to the Registrability of Smell-marks.
Background Banksy’s graffiti artwork Laugh Now first appeared in Brighton, England, in 2002. A trademark holder must make “genuine use” of a registration by using it to acquire market share in relation to distinguishable goods or services. Ultimately, the EUIPO declared the trademark registration of Laugh Now invalid.
The evolving landscape of the rules governing extensions of time at the evidence stage of opposition proceedings, particularly examining the transition from the Trade Marks Rules of 2002 (hereinafter “2002 Rules”) to the Trade Mark Rules 2017 (hereinafter “2017 Rules”) is a topic which has sparked significant debate recently.
2] This new set of marks is often referred to as non-traditional trademarks , and the qualification for their registration, as opposed to a traditional mark, is substantially higher. [3] I do this by demonstrating the statutory criteria for trademark registration and then applying the set criteria to check the registrability of braille.
The Delhi High Court also passed an important order refusing to set aside the order from the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Right Authority, revoking the registration of Pepsico’s FL 2027 potato variety. For instance, the Delhi High Court directed Oppo to deposit the royalty amount, in its high-profile SEP litigation with Nokia.
Earlier this fall the Federal Court of Canada issued a rare decision concerning industrial design infringement and reaffirmed several points of law favouring holders of industrial design registrations in Canada seeking to enforce their rights. By: Smart & Biggar
And in the case of the trademark registered under classes, the plaintiff has never filed any documents proving that they deal with the food products and such registrations are liable for cancellation for non-usage. The fourth schedule to Trade Marks Rules, 2002 – [link]. 1] Section 2(1)(zb), Trade Marks Act, 1999. [2]
The GC recalled that “a design is declared invalid, in accordance with the provisions of Article 8 of Regulation No 6/2002, only in the case where all of its characteristics are excluded from protection. In this context, Lego filed design registrations related to modular systems composed by its bricks.
Court refused the registration for Philips Co. vs. Mehtab Ahmed 99 (2002) DLT 678 Where court observed that the nature of the goods is identical, and it immensely affects the identifying value of the original owner’s mark. c ) The registered trademark has a reputation in India which will be negatively affected. ( In ITC Limited v.
The NAKED condom case returned to the TTAB after a CAFC reversal [ TTABlogged here ] and the Supreme Court's denial of the registrant's petition for writ of certiorari (September 2021). He conducted clinical trials in 2000 and manufacturing began in 2002-2003. He developed his own formula for a lubricant, as well as special packaging.
In the second , I looked at the group registration procedures – recently made available by the US Copyright Office – which are specifically useful to bloggers and to managers of blog sites. Be that as it may, our focus so far has been on the benefits of copyright – specifically copyright registration – for digital content creators.
iii] [Image Sources : Shutterstock] As a result, a corporation is globally recognized when it has met the registration criteria in its State of incorporation. Ebke, ‘The ‘Real Seat’ Doctrine in the Conflict of Corporate Laws’, 36 [2002] International Lawyer 1015- 1037, 1016. vi] Ebke (2002) op.cit., 12-13; Siems (2002) op.cit.
There is no registration fee for any of the seminars. Though he applied in 1992, registration was granted only in 2020. Later, he discovered the trademark had expired since 2002 without prior notice, violating Rule 58(3) of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017. Read the post for more details. Citing Jaisuryas Retail Ventures v.
As background to a (lengthy) case leading to interesting decision of the General Court, the EUIPO’s department responsible for the trade mark register erroneously rectified the registration of Veuve Cliquot’s iconic orange mark as “another mark” or a “colour mark”, in lieu of a figurative mark.
In this opposition to registration of the mark MOUNTAIN GATEWAY COMMUNITY COLLEGE for educational services and various clothing items, Applicant Virginia Community College Systems moved for summary judgment, asserting that the Board lacked subject matter jurisdiction due to state sovereign immunity. Maritime Comm’n v. State Ports Auth.,
An Analysis of the Order Firstly, for context, a rectification application must be filed under Sections 47, 57, 68 , or 77 (as applicable) of the TM Act read with Rule 92 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2002. 2016) held that Section 124 does not limit a party’s ability to seek rectification of a trademark registration.
"The similarities of the marks, coupled with similarity in goods marketed in the same trade channels to the same classes of consumers" led to the Board conclusion that confusion is likely "resulting from registration of the Application." [Is Can registration of a mark cause confusion? - 2002); s ee also Detroit Athletic, 903 F.3d
The USPTO refused registration (on the Supplemental Register) of the proposed mark FILATI in the stylized form shown below, for "Knitting yarns; Thread; Yarn; all of the foregoing for textile use," on the ground of genericness. 88807623 (July 7, 2002) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Marc A.
For clarity, it is important to know that Rule 9 of the MP Foreign Liquor Rules focuses on the registration of labels. These Rules are applicable to register labels of wine and beer as well, as per Rule 12 of the MP Beer and Wine Rules.
It is crucial to take into account whether two marks are “deceptively similar,” “similar,” “nearly resembling,” or its equivalent when it comes to the registration of trademarks, which includes the application process, opposition and rectification proceedings, and infringement and passing-off lawsuits.
This finding is almost the entirety of the ratio for cancelling Pepsico’s registration, and goes to the extent of questioning as how a sophisticated corporate having over a century’s experience in protecting IP rights, could have failed on such account.
The Board rendered a split decision in this opposition to registration of the mark EVOGUE for a wide variety of consumer electronic devices and accessories, tossing out Opposer Advance Magazine's Section 2(d) claim but partly upholding its dilution claim, based on the registered mark VOGUE for, inter alia , magazines and mobile phone software.
There are also cases on both sides of the issue where courts have held that trademark registrations related to the underlying controversy are sufficient to establish specific or personal jurisdiction. Pentapharm AG , 2002 WL 31749195, at *6 (N.D. to justify jurisdiction. In an earlier decision in Haemoscope Corp. See also Quick Techs.,
The Trade Marks Act, 1999 governs trademark law in India and provides for the registration, protection, and enforcement of trademarks. 14 provides that if anyone files an application for the registration of a trademark, the consent of the living person must be taken and it should not be falsely or fraudulently obtained.
Highlights of the Week Learning from India’s Disastrous Experience in Protecting Itself against Biopiracy In light of the upcoming WIPO Diplomatic Conference on Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge, Prashant Reddy brings us a post highlighting India’s sub-par experience with its own Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
vs M/S Mh 7 News And Anr on 20 November, 2024 (Delhi High Court) Image from here The petitioner, engaged in broadcasting services under the registered trademark “MH1/MH ONE” since 2002, sought cancellation of the respondent’s trademark “MH7,” registered in 2017, alleging deceptive similarity.
Plaintiffs submitted to the court that on 19 th September 2020, Parle had applied for the registration of the trademark, “Be the Fizz! The said application being presently pending, having been opposed by PepsiCo, Parle could not infringe on the trademark registration in the name of PepsiCo. For the Bold!”
Furthermore, Tesco argued that further applications in 2002, 2005 and 2007, were also made in bad faith because they were seeking to “evergreen” the 1995 registration recognising that the rights would be lost for non-use in each successive five year period.
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