IPHONE mark held inherently non-distinctive


Apple Inc applied to the Swiss Trade Mark Office to register the word mark IPHONE for broadly worded goods in classes 9 and 28, the specified class 9 goods being essentially telephones and functionally related products. The Office rejected the application for the class 9 goods on the grounds that the mark IPHONE will be immediately understood by consumers as describing a telephone with internet- or information technology-related functions, and accordingly represents a non-distinctive, descriptive indication.

Apple appealed the decision to the Federal...


Please log in to read the rest of this article.

New to Managing Intellectual Property? Take advantage of one week’s FREE access and become a Managing IP member today. It’s free to join and the benefits start straight away.

Already registered?

Please make sure you log in to read the rest of the article.

Log in

Join us now

Gain 7 days FREE access when you register now.

Join here

profile

Managing IP

ManagingIP

ManagingIP profile

.@julianhitchcock's guest blog asks if the CJEU is competent to decide scientific cases http://t.co/XAc4B5CIui …. Can you guess his answer?

Jul 23 2014 10:50 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
ManagingIP profile

@julianhitchcock asks in a guest blog if the CJEU is competent to decide scientific cases http://t.co/XAc4B5CIui. Can you guess the answer?

Jul 23 2014 10:01 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
ManagingIP profile

Congratulations! RT @FOSSpatents: Thanks @ManagingIP for naming me for the 5th time (2005, 2006, 2012, 2013, 2014) to your #mip50 list!

Jul 23 2014 09:00 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
More from the Managing IP blog


Read this year's INTA Daily News - published daily by Managing IP direct from the INTA Annual Meeting in Hong Kong



July/August 2014

IP’s most influential people 2014

The 50 people in social media, advocacy and debate influencing IP policy



Most read articles

Supplements