The here
Minggu, 21 Maret 2004
Sabtu, 20 Maret 2004
Ip Dispute Resolution: Read All Near It
Last Nov 1 one-half of the IPKat, Jeremy Phillips, gave a newspaper at the PATINNOVA '03 Conference inwards Luxembourg. The theme was intellectual belongings dispute resolution inwards the "new" Europe, i.e. the enlarged EU which volition hold upwards inwards beingness from 1 May. His newspaper contrasted the pros in addition to cons of litigation, arbitration in addition to mediation in addition to concluded that, ultimately, dispute resolution is a potentially expensive trouble organisation conclusion in addition to should hold upwards judged past times the same criteria equally whatever other trouble organisation spend. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 revised version of this newspaper has right away been published inwards the March edition of Managing Intellectual Property nether the championship "How to Enforce Rights inwards Europe". Jeremy writes: "If you lot read this article in addition to convey whatever comments, nonetheless critical, delight allow me know".
The novel Europe here in addition to here
Dispute resolution inwards the onetime Europe here in addition to here
The novel Europe here in addition to here
Dispute resolution inwards the onetime Europe here in addition to here
Jumat, 19 Maret 2004
Of Famous Folk, Fans Together With Followers
The United Kingdom of Great Britain in addition to Northern Ireland Trade Mark Registry issued yesterday (Thursday eighteen March) a novel Practice Amendment Notice, PAN 5/04, on "Names of Famous People (Living in addition to Deceased) in addition to Groups". volition provide to weblog this PAN inwards item 1 time he's had the fourth dimension to read it properly. In the meantime, he volition hand away 1 of its niggling secrets: it addresses 1 time once to a greater extent than somewhat British obsession alongside the extent to which merchandise marks are registrable for badges of allegiance.
Other British obsessions here, here and here
Other British obsessions here, here and here
Trade Marks Every Moment Social Characters: The Novel Legal Issues Of Identity Protection
’s latest invitee blogger is Massimo Sterpi. Massimo, a partner inwards the Turin-based IP practise of Jacobacci e Associati, is a fellow member of the editorial board of the European Copyright together with Design Reports; he is likewise an active fellow member of the MARQUES council. Massimo writes:
“Over the years, merchandise marks create got evolved from distinctive signs applied on products to highlight their origin, to brands (i.e. to signs symbolising likewise the goodwill attached to the merchandise mark) and, eventually, to “avatars”, i.e. to variety of fictional characters which impersonate the lifestyle, gear upwardly of values together with emotions embedded inwards the merchandise mark.
In other words, merchandise marks create got matured from distinctive signs ancillary to a production (trade marks), to economical entities valuable per se (brands), to proper “social personae”, having their ain identity together with grapheme (avatars).
In a sense, it is no longer the merchandise score that distinguishes the product, precisely it is the production which impersonates the brand/avatar. As ane commentator said talking close the Lacoste crocodile logo: “the crocodile has eaten the T-shirt”.
Such a revolution cannot survive ignored when trying to protect the novel brands/avatars.
Whereas a traditional merchandise mark, i.e. a sign intended to distinguish a production of a job concern from identical or similar products of other businesses, should survive protected solely against strict adventure of confusion or association, brands – together with specially famous brands – create got to survive protected likewise against dilution, i.e. uses of identical/similar signs for different goods that are probable to create got undue wages of or elbow grease prejudice to the reputation of the brand.
Now, if nosotros see that the latest merchandise marks create got locomote “avatars” – i.e. social personae impersonating the lifestyle, gear upwardly of values together with emotions embedded inwards the merchandise score – their protection cannot survive whatever longer restricted to avoid adventure of confusion/association or to forestall dilution, precisely it must locomote a variety of identity protection. In other words, to properly protect the avatar’s identity, it volition no to a greater extent than survive sufficient to protect it against other identical or similar signs used commercially for similar or different products. In fact, the identity of the avatar – every bit the ane of a physical mortal – may survive tarnished likewise yesteryear non-commercial uses of same (satire, world criticism, purpose inwards undesirable contexts).
The best testify that merchandise marks are immediately considered every bit powerful social players (and therefore, every bit avatars) is the variety of criticism they received inwards the final years. Books such every bit No Logo yesteryear Naomi Klein have strongly criticised the “new” merchandise marks every bit they locomote mere representation of lifestyle (Nike, Gap), loosing their master business office of identification of source and, rather, permitting the truthful source of the production (whose fabrication is oft delocalised inwards the 3rd world) to survive hidden. “Sucks” sites are oft devoted non that much to the character of the products nether the criticised merchandise mark, precisely rather to the merchandise score possessor corporate policies or to the lifestyle they symbolise.
Currently, owners of the novel brands/avatars create got to report how to protect the “identity” of their merchandise marks. Old agency such every bit sentry services on novel merchandise score filings together with patrolling of the markets is no longer plenty to protect this identity.
Patrolling must survive immediately extended to the press, production placements inwards films, purpose of brands inwards artworks, boycotts, together with symbolic attacks.
Proper legal remedies – other than merchandise score infringement actions – together with world relation strategies are to survive devised to protect the build identity together with reputation.
It is immediately clear that damages to the brands produce non come upwardly solely from counterfeiting together with strict (commercial) infringement, precisely likewise from whatever degree of libel or bad world relation deriving from consumers’ boycott, sabotage, satire, world criticism.
Now to a greater extent than than ever, merchandise marks rights (including the novel “identity” right) may yet conflict amongst other key rights such every bit the correct of gratis speech communication or the artistic liberty of expression. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 proper residuum betwixt these rights has to survive establish on a illustration yesteryear illustration basis”.
“Over the years, merchandise marks create got evolved from distinctive signs applied on products to highlight their origin, to brands (i.e. to signs symbolising likewise the goodwill attached to the merchandise mark) and, eventually, to “avatars”, i.e. to variety of fictional characters which impersonate the lifestyle, gear upwardly of values together with emotions embedded inwards the merchandise mark.
In other words, merchandise marks create got matured from distinctive signs ancillary to a production (trade marks), to economical entities valuable per se (brands), to proper “social personae”, having their ain identity together with grapheme (avatars).
In a sense, it is no longer the merchandise score that distinguishes the product, precisely it is the production which impersonates the brand/avatar. As ane commentator said talking close the Lacoste crocodile logo: “the crocodile has eaten the T-shirt”.
Such a revolution cannot survive ignored when trying to protect the novel brands/avatars.
Whereas a traditional merchandise mark, i.e. a sign intended to distinguish a production of a job concern from identical or similar products of other businesses, should survive protected solely against strict adventure of confusion or association, brands – together with specially famous brands – create got to survive protected likewise against dilution, i.e. uses of identical/similar signs for different goods that are probable to create got undue wages of or elbow grease prejudice to the reputation of the brand.
Now, if nosotros see that the latest merchandise marks create got locomote “avatars” – i.e. social personae impersonating the lifestyle, gear upwardly of values together with emotions embedded inwards the merchandise score – their protection cannot survive whatever longer restricted to avoid adventure of confusion/association or to forestall dilution, precisely it must locomote a variety of identity protection. In other words, to properly protect the avatar’s identity, it volition no to a greater extent than survive sufficient to protect it against other identical or similar signs used commercially for similar or different products. In fact, the identity of the avatar – every bit the ane of a physical mortal – may survive tarnished likewise yesteryear non-commercial uses of same (satire, world criticism, purpose inwards undesirable contexts).
The best testify that merchandise marks are immediately considered every bit powerful social players (and therefore, every bit avatars) is the variety of criticism they received inwards the final years. Books such every bit No Logo yesteryear Naomi Klein have strongly criticised the “new” merchandise marks every bit they locomote mere representation of lifestyle (Nike, Gap), loosing their master business office of identification of source and, rather, permitting the truthful source of the production (whose fabrication is oft delocalised inwards the 3rd world) to survive hidden. “Sucks” sites are oft devoted non that much to the character of the products nether the criticised merchandise mark, precisely rather to the merchandise score possessor corporate policies or to the lifestyle they symbolise.
Currently, owners of the novel brands/avatars create got to report how to protect the “identity” of their merchandise marks. Old agency such every bit sentry services on novel merchandise score filings together with patrolling of the markets is no longer plenty to protect this identity.
Patrolling must survive immediately extended to the press, production placements inwards films, purpose of brands inwards artworks, boycotts, together with symbolic attacks.
Proper legal remedies – other than merchandise score infringement actions – together with world relation strategies are to survive devised to protect the build identity together with reputation.
It is immediately clear that damages to the brands produce non come upwardly solely from counterfeiting together with strict (commercial) infringement, precisely likewise from whatever degree of libel or bad world relation deriving from consumers’ boycott, sabotage, satire, world criticism.
Now to a greater extent than than ever, merchandise marks rights (including the novel “identity” right) may yet conflict amongst other key rights such every bit the correct of gratis speech communication or the artistic liberty of expression. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 proper residuum betwixt these rights has to survive establish on a illustration yesteryear illustration basis”.
In The Driving Seat
Always bang-up to boost his vocabulary, the IPKat delights inwards learning novel words. Imagine his delight, therefore, at finding the give-and-take “Volvoid” on the US of America Word Spy website. So what is a Volvoid? He is a white, moderately affluent, suburban professional person who is politically liberal. The give-and-take seems to endure a assort of metonymy, “Volvo” existence a symbol of white, liberal, affluent Sweden. The Word Spy adds a caveat: “There's a unlike adjectival feel of this give-and-take that agency ‘of or relating to Volvos or Volvo drivers’ or, equally a noun, ‘a Volvo driver’. This feel dates to well-nigh 1988”. In the lite of this, the IPKat wonders what assort of Americans buy Volvo cars these days, what message the Volvo construct cite sends them together with what their self-image is.
Click hither for metonymy, monotony, monopoly and monogamy
Click hither for metonymy, monotony, monopoly and monogamy
Kamis, 18 Maret 2004
The Solely Skillful Indian …?
The subscription-only All England Direct service has simply thrown upwards some other United Kingdom of Great Britain in addition to Northern Ireland of Britain in addition to Northern Republic of Ireland merchandise rank case, Mukadam v Indobrit Magazine Ltd in addition to some other (Chancery Division, 17 March, earlier Deputy Judge Peter Leaver QC). Mukadam owned ii registered merchandise marks, the get-go beingness a give-and-take mark, INDOBRIT, the instant consisting of the give-and-take INDOBRIT in addition to a star: both were registered for printed matter. The defendants published a magazine nether the get upwards Indobrit. He sued the publishers of the Indobrit magazine for merchandise rank infringement in addition to won.
The trial is no surprise. What interests the IPKat is the fact that the give-and-take “Indobrit” got registered at all. It seems every bit descriptive a term every bit “Anglo-Saxon” or “Afro-American” in addition to its pregnant is in addition to therefore manifestly guessable that it seems foreign that anyone should live on able to obtain a monopoly of its role inwards the cultural media. Even to a greater extent than surprising is the fact that, if his Google search is anything to larn by, the give-and-take “Indobrit” solely seems to live on used past times or inwards relation to the defendant’s magazine.
Some Indo-contributions to British civilization here, here, here, here and here
The trial is no surprise. What interests the IPKat is the fact that the give-and-take “Indobrit” got registered at all. It seems every bit descriptive a term every bit “Anglo-Saxon” or “Afro-American” in addition to its pregnant is in addition to therefore manifestly guessable that it seems foreign that anyone should live on able to obtain a monopoly of its role inwards the cultural media. Even to a greater extent than surprising is the fact that, if his Google search is anything to larn by, the give-and-take “Indobrit” solely seems to live on used past times or inwards relation to the defendant’s magazine.
Some Indo-contributions to British civilization here, here, here, here and here
Own Lift Defence Forcefulness Has Spheres Of Influence
is pleased to meet around to a greater extent than merchandise grade cases trickling through the courts. One of the novel batch is IBM v Web-Sphere Ltd. IBM registered WebSphere every bit a CTM for reckoner software as well as communications services. Meanwhile, the defendant, a provider of services connected amongst the internet, changed its hollo from the hollo nether which it had been incorporated to Web-Sphere. IBM got current of air of this as well as requested that the accused alter its name. The accused refused as well as distributed leaflets stating that IBM had made threats towards it
as well as acted inwards restraint of trade. It likewise claimed that the hollo was non lawfully merchandise marked yesteryear IBM. IBM launched infringement as well as malicious falsehood proceedings.
The identity of real rigid similarity of the 2 signs, together amongst the identity of the goods on which they were used meant that infringement was found. Web-Sphere’s attempts to rely on the own-name defense forcefulness failed because the name-change had exclusively taken house afterwards the IBM had launched its WebSphere product. Thus, at that topographic point was a rigid inference that the defendant’s companionship hollo had been chosen to accept payoff of IBM’s reputation as well as goodwill. However, the malicious falsehood claim failed. While the statements made yesteryear the accused inwards its leaflets were untrue as well as malicious, it wasn’t possible to found that whatever harm had been caused to IBM because the defendant’s leaflets exclusively had a real express circulation as well as was amateurish compared to the accomplish as well as character of IBM’s advertising.
applauds around other sensible decision. It would last ludicrous if a accused could accept payoff of the ain hollo defense forcefulness yesteryear changing its companionship hollo to accommodate the merchandise grade it wants to copy afterwards finding out that the claimant’s grade has been registered.
Webs here, here as well as here
Spheres here, here and here
as well as acted inwards restraint of trade. It likewise claimed that the hollo was non lawfully merchandise marked yesteryear IBM. IBM launched infringement as well as malicious falsehood proceedings.
The identity of real rigid similarity of the 2 signs, together amongst the identity of the goods on which they were used meant that infringement was found. Web-Sphere’s attempts to rely on the own-name defense forcefulness failed because the name-change had exclusively taken house afterwards the IBM had launched its WebSphere product. Thus, at that topographic point was a rigid inference that the defendant’s companionship hollo had been chosen to accept payoff of IBM’s reputation as well as goodwill. However, the malicious falsehood claim failed. While the statements made yesteryear the accused inwards its leaflets were untrue as well as malicious, it wasn’t possible to found that whatever harm had been caused to IBM because the defendant’s leaflets exclusively had a real express circulation as well as was amateurish compared to the accomplish as well as character of IBM’s advertising.
applauds around other sensible decision. It would last ludicrous if a accused could accept payoff of the ain hollo defense forcefulness yesteryear changing its companionship hollo to accommodate the merchandise grade it wants to copy afterwards finding out that the claimant’s grade has been registered.
Webs here, here as well as here
Spheres here, here and here
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)