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
As a result, the rise of hypersensitivity to religion, religious texts, and religious symbols determines the jurisprudence around the utilisation of such marks under Indian trademarklaw, even if they are not strictly prohibited. 6] Section 9(2)(b) of the Indian Trademarks Act, 1999. [7] 8] 2011 (48) PTC 235 (Del.) (DB)
That case centered around the issue of whether the applicant’s “JU DIAN & Design Mark” was obtained in bad faith contrary to 18(1)(e) of TMA or was otherwise invalid per 18(1)(b) or 18(1)(d) of the TMA. The following family of JU DIAN character trademarks have been heavily used in China to promote their restaurants. Background.
Such disputes, very often setting important legal precedents, influence trademark protection and enforcement globally. FAMOUS CASES OF TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT 1.Foreign Samsung : This was a case, from 2011 to 2018, where Apple took the word against Samsung, claiming infringement of its smartphone design and utility patents.
Unicolors’s business model is to create artwork, copyright it, print the artwork on fabric, and market the designed fabrics to garment manufacturers.” A Google search turns up three different pairs of designs with differing degrees of similarity. b)(4)(i)(A) (2011). Factual and Procedural Background. 3d 1194 , 1196 (9th Cir.
The Trademarklaw in India, known as Trade Marks Act, 1999, comes into force according to the rules established under the International Principles laid down in TRIPS (Trademark-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement).
This is the latest entry in a long-running legal battle between Hayley Paige Gutman, a bridalwear designer, and JLM Couture, her one-time employer. Gutman created a Pinterest account in 2011 and an Instagram account in 2012, shortly after she began working for JLM. Kravitz An Update on PhoneDog v. Spartz, Inc. Christou v.
19] Being able to distinguish one’s trademark falls at the centre of the trademarklaw, as otherwise, it is liable to be rejected under Section 9(1) of the Act. Komal, Protection of non-traditional Trademarks: Issues and the Road Ahead, 11(2) TUCOMAT 695, 697 (2020). [2] 5] Trademark Act, 1999, §2, No.
Designer Tara Martin launched the “My Other Bag” handbag line in 2011. Her canvas tote bags say “My Other Bag…” on one side, and the other side contains a drawing or image of a high-end designer handbag, such as Louis Vuitton. By: Sharon Urias, Esq. The My Other Bag totes typically are priced between $35.00 and $55.00.
In 2013, Interprofession du Gruyère, sought and received from the USPTO a certification mark for a design with stylized font, for the letters “AOC”, a Swiss cross, and the words “LE GRUYÈRE SWITZERLAND.” This protected designation was superseded by adoption of the Protected Designation of Origin (“PDO”) for GRUYÈRE in 2001.
The district court granted the motion, ruling that P&P had failed to produce evidence “of secondary meaning” because it failed to show that consumers would associate its trade dress specifically with P&P, relying on a 2011 Ninth Circuit case, Fleischer Studios, Inc. P&P appealed the summary judgment ruling to the Ninth Circuit.
He was unmistakably aware of the nuances regarding colours in trademarklaw. Broadly speaking, trademarks are of two types: traditional and non-traditional. [1] Notwithstanding the essence of this finding, this is too narrow an interpretation of the true spirit of trademarklaw. 131, 132-133 (2020). [2]
The platform integrates platforms, digital accelerators, domain and design skills, and solid partnerships in a “rich creator-partner economy.” The general public could view the collection’s three-dimensional designs by scanning a QR code. 181 (2011) DLT 716. [2]
In 2013, Interprofession du Gruyère, sought and received from the USPTO a certification mark for a design with stylized font, for the letters “AOC”, a Swiss cross, and the words “LE GRUYÈRE SWITZERLAND.” The test turns upon the primary significance that the term would have to the relevant public.
On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court adopted a restrictive view of the extraterritorial application of the Lanham Act, holding that federal trademarklaw cannot support a claim for trademark infringement against solely foreign conduct. The case is Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc.
The current statute provides protection of these celebrity rights under trademarklaw, copyright law as well as passing off action for infringing the said rights. under the trademarklaws. Also, Indian law recognises personality rights if the person has individually acquired public recognition.
19 The distinctive character of a trade mark must be assessed by reference, first, to the goods or services in respect of which registration is sought and, second, to the perception of the relevant public (see judgment of 12 February 2004, Henkel, C‑218/01, EU:C:2004:88, paragraph 50 and the case-law cited).
In Romag , the Court examined whether a plaintiff in a trademark infringement action is required to show that a defendant willfully infringed the plaintiff’s trademark to obtain a profits award. But even if the Court put aside these issues, its own survey of the case law was less convincing than Fossil would have had the Court believe.
The court starts its trademark analysis nostalgically: “Turn back the clock to the Internet’s nascent age—1999.” Netscape and 2011 Network Automation cases modified it. ” (How about this: let’s not). The court recounts the perennially problematic Brookfield case and how the 2004 Playboy v.
Finally, Apple uses its trademarks largely within its marketing strategies in such a way that they are displayed in advertisements, product packaging, and retail shops, which serves to sustain its high-tech and premium brand image. Recent developments include e-filing and expedited examination procedures designed to facilitate registration.
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