Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Analysing the Indian trademark system

Omesh Puri and Amaya Singh of LexOrbis provide an overview of the Indian trademark system, including trademark prosecution and enforcement

In India, the Trade Marks Act 1999 and the rules thereunder guide the process of registration and enforcement of rights relating to trademarks. The Indian regime affords protection to registered as well as unregistered marks. In case of misuse of a registered mark, the right holder can initiate an infringement action against the violating party. For misuse of unregistered marks, the right holder is entitled to claim protection under the law of passing off. In order to succeed in an action for passing off, the plaintiff must meet these three criteria: (1) established goodwill or reputation of the plaintiff attached to the relevant goods or services under its mark, (2) misrepresentation by the defendant which is likely to deceive the public into believing that the defendant's goods/services emanate from the plaintiff and (3) damage suffered or likely to be suffered by the plaintiff.

It is important to remember that the Indian regime affords high importance to prior use. Therefore, an infringement action on the basis of a prior registered mark by a registered proprietor may not succeed against a prior user. Trans-border reputation also holds huge weight, but a party relying on trans-border reputation must be able to prove the acquisition of this reputation in India before the date of adoption and use of the relevant mark by the other party in India.

Even though remedies have been provided to owners of unregistered marks, it is still always advisable to register a mark because in actions based on registered marks, the onus of disproving infringement lies with the defendant. On the contrary, when an action is initiated on the basis of unregistered marks, the plaintiff has to discharge a heavy burden of meeting the threefold criteria of passing off as mentioned above.

Prosecution

Procedure

Searches

Searches can be carried out for identical/similar word/device marks at the online portal of the Trademarks Registry.

Examination

A trademark application can be filed physically or through the e-portal. Once filed, it first undergoes scrutiny for procedural formalities. If it fails this formality check phase, an office action is issued and a reply to this must be filed/executed within 30 days from the date of its receipt. After completion of the formality check phase, the application undergoes substantial examination. If objections are raised by the Trade Marks Office (TMO), a response must be filed within one month from the date of receipt of the examination report. After reviewing the response, if the examiner continues to maintain the objection(s), a hearing is scheduled. In the alternative, if the examiner is satisfied with the response, the mark is advertised as accepted in the Trade Marks Journal.

Opposition

Once a mark is advertised, third parties have a period of four months (non-extendable) from the date of such advertisement of the mark to file a Notice of Opposition. Once the Notice of Opposition is filed, the applicant is required to file its counterstatement within two months (non-extendable) from the date of official service of the Notice of Opposition. Once the counterstatement is filed by the applicant, the opponent is required to file its Evidence in Support of Opposition within two months (non-extendable) from the date of official service of such counterstatement. Alternatively, he may intimate to the registrar that he does not wish to adduce any evidence at this stage and may rely on the contents of his Notice of Opposition. Thereafter, the applicant is required to file its Evidence in support of Application within two months (non-extendable) from the receipt of the Evidence in support of Opposition or the intimation that the opponent does not wish to adduce any evidence. Alternatively, the applicant may intimate to the registrar that he does not wish to adduce any evidence and may rely on the contents of his counterstatement. Subsequent to the service of the Evidence in Support of Application to the opponent or the intimation that the applicant does not wish to adduce any evidence, the opponent may file its Evidence in Reply within one month (non-extendable) of such service. Upon completion of the evidence stage, the registrar issues notice of hearing to both the parties and decides the matter on merits.

Registration

If no opposition is filed by any third party within four months from the date of publication, the mark smoothly sails towards registration.

Rectification/cancellation

A registration can be cancelled on grounds that it was wrongly granted and/or it remains on register contrary to law. It can also be cancelled on the ground of continuous non-use for five years from the date of its registration.

Ownership changes and right transfers

Assignment

Both registered and unregistered marks can be assigned. Assignment can be made either in respect of all or part of the goods and services for which the mark is registered.

Licence

The application for recording of a licence/registration of a registered user must be filed within six months from the date of signing of the licence agreement.

Change of name and address

Change of name and address applications should be filed at the Trademarks Registry to keep the records in order.

Renewal

A mark is valid for a time period of 10 years from the application date and needs to be renewed every 10 years thereafter.

Information/documents required

Application filing

1) Exact representation of the mark.

2) Name, address and legal status of the applicant.

3) Details of goods/services.

4) A simply signed power of attorney (PoA) of the applicant. No notarisation or legalisation is required.

5) Priority details and a certified copy of the priority document along with its certified English translation, in case of a priority claim.

6) In case of user claim – date, month and year of first use along with evidence to corroborate the same. A user affidavit supported with evidence is a mandatory requirement. If no use claim is made, the applications may be filed on a 'proposed to be used' basis.

Assignment

1) Original signed or notarised Deed of Assignment

2) Original signed and notarised Affidavit of No Legal Proceedings stating that there are no legal proceedings pending in respect of the trademarks and assignment

3) A simply signed PoA of the assignee.

Licence

1) An original or notarised copy of the executed licence agreement.

2) A notarised affidavit from the licensor (registered proprietor/owner) or his/her duly authorised representative stating the following:

(a) the particulars of the relationship (as existing or proposed) between the registered proprietor and the proposed registered user including particulars showing the degree of control by the proprietor over the permitted use and as to whether the proposed registered user is the sole registered user or if there are any other restrictions on the number of persons to be applied as registered users;

(b) the exact specification of the goods and/or services in respect of which the licensee is to be registered as the registered user;

(c) the conditions or restrictions (if any) with respect to the characteristics of the goods /services, the mode or place of permitted use or any other matter;

(d) the exact duration of the permitted use or whether it is to exist without any limit of period.

3) A simply signed PoA of the licensor and licensee.

Change of name

1) Any document evidencing change of name (for example, certified copy of an extract from the Commercial Register).

2) A simply signed PoA with the new name of the proprietor.

Change of address

1) Any document evidencing the change of address (for example, certified copy of an extract from the Commercial Register).

2) Date on which the address was changed in DD/MM/YYYY format (only in registered matters).

3) A simply signed PoA with the new address of the proprietor

Renewal

1) A simply signed PoA of the proprietor.

Enforcement

Anti-counterfeiting

Anti-counterfeiting is a major aspect of enforcement of trademark rights of proprietors and right holders, and the term "counterfeiting" is also defined in Section 28 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as essentially meaning an act which causes one thing to resemble another thing, intending by means of that resemblance to practise deception, or knowing it to be that deception will thereby be practised. Further, it is not essential for counterfeiting that the imitation should be exact. Moreover, Section 415 of the IPC read with illustration (b) makes the act of counterfeiting into an act of cheating which can either entail imprisonment that may extend to one year, or a fine, or both. Since the sale of counterfeit goods is intended to make illegal profits by defrauding customers and other members of the trade and the public, the courts in India consider such acts as an offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property under Section 420 of the IPC, which is punishable with imprisonment of seven years along with a fine.

Sections 102, 103 and 104 of the Trademarks Act also define offences, penalties and procedures in relation to falsification and falsely applying trademarks. These provisions include the offence of counterfeiting and provide for imprisonment for a term not under six months which may extend up to three years and a fine not less than INR 50,000/(USD 742) but which could be enhanced to INR 200,000 (USD 2,966). The term of imprisonment and a fine can be further increased on second and subsequent convictions. The offences defined under the Trade Marks Act are recognisable offences allowing a police officer of a designated rank to make or cause an arrest of the offenders without warrant and to start an investigation with or without the permission of a court. However, prior to taking any action under the Trade Marks Act, police officers are required to seek an opinion from the registrar of trademarks on the facts of the case.

Border control

The government of India has enabled IP owners to enforce their IP rights at Indian borders under the Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007. For this, it is mandatory to have a validly registered trademark/IP right in place. The period of protection available under customs is five years from the recordation of rights with the customs authorities or upon expiry of the validity of registration of the mark/IP right, whichever is earlier. After the expiry of five years, the right holder is required to furnish a fresh notice.

Infringement/passing off

Under the Trade Marks Act, a civil action for infringement of a registered trademark can be filed by the registered proprietor or the registered user of the trademark in India before a district court having jurisdiction to try the suit. In cases where the infringement occurs in the metropolitan areas of Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata, the suit can also be filed before the concerned High Court in those cities. A civil suit against the infringer may also be initiated alongside criminal action for effective deterrence since the import/sale of counterfeit goods also amounts to infringement. Further, in cases of trademark infringement and passing off involving an artistic work as the subject matter, it is useful for the right holder to plead infringement of his/her copyright in such artwork thus invoking the enforceable provisions of copyright law as well. The remedies provided under a civil suit include preliminary and permanent injunction, account of profits or damages, delivery-up of the infringing labels/marks for destruction or erasure, etc. In appropriate cases, the Courts in India have not hesitated from awarding punitive or exemplary damages to the right holder for effective deterrence even amounting to 10 million rupees (USD 146,920). The court entertaining a civil suit is also empowered to appoint a commissioner or commissioners to visit the business premises of the defendant without notice, to inspect the premises and make an inventory of the counterfeit goods for their safe custody by the defendant as court property. This means that once recorded by the commissioner, the defendant cannot deal with or sell those goods to any third party without obtaining prior permission from the concerned civil court. In case the counterfeited mark is not registered in India, a civil action for passing off can be initiated under Section 27(2) read with Sections 134 & 135 of the act if the mark carries substantial goodwill/reputation in the relevant market. The remedies available under a passing off action are the same as in the case of an action for infringement.


むンドの商暙暩制床の抂芁

むンドでは、1999幎商暙法以䞋、「商暙法」ずいう、及びそれに基づく芏則が、商暙に関連する暩利の登録ず執行のプロセスの指針ずなっおいる。むンド圓局は、登録及び未登録の商暙を保護しおいる。登録商暙の䞍正䜿甚の堎合には、暩利保持者が、違反者に察する暩利䟵害蚎蚟を行うこずができる。未登録の商暙の䞍正䜿甚の堎合には、暩利保持者はパッシング・オフ法に基づき、保護を芁求できる。パッシング・オフを請求する蚎蚟で勝぀ためには、原告は次の3぀の基準を満たす必芁がある(1)原告が商暙の䞋で物品又はサヌビスを扱うこずに察し評刀ず信甚が確立されおいる、(2)被告の物品サヌビスが原告が提䟛するものであるず思われる可胜性がある被告による停りの行為が存圚する、及び(3)原告が受ける損害又は損害の可胜性が存圚する。

重芁なこずは、むンド圓局は、先䜿甚を重芖するずいうこずである。したがっお、正匏な所有暩者が先に登録した商暙に察しお暩利䟵害蚎蚟を起こしおも以前からの䜿甚者に察しおは成功しない可胜性がある。囜際的な評刀も極めお重芁であるが、囜際的な評刀を䞻匵する圓事者は、盞手方圓事者が、むンドにおいお圓該商暙を採甚し、䜿甚した日以前に、むンドでその評刀を獲埗した事実を蚌明する必芁がある。

たずえ、救枈措眮が未登録商暙の所有者に察し行われおいたずしおも、登録商暙に基づいた蚎蚟の堎合、被告は䟵害を論駁する責任が課されるため、必ず商暙を登録するこずが望たしい。それどころか、未登録商暙に基づいお蚎蚟が行われる堎合、原告は䞊述のパッシング・オフに関する3぀の基準を満たしおいるこずを蚌明するずいう重倧な責務を免責される。

1. 起蚎

手順

調査

商暙登録のオンラむン・ポヌタルで同䞀類䌌した単語商暙図案の調査を行なうこずができる。

怜査

商暙申請は、物理的手段又はe-ポヌタルを通じお提出できる。出願埌、最初に手続き䞊の調査が行われる。この調査で䞍備があった堎合、拒絶通知曞が発行され、その受取の日付から30日以内に同通知に察する回答を提出、もしくは遵守を衚明する。手続き䞊の調査完了埌、正匏な審査が行われる。Trade Marks Office(TMO)によっお異議が申し立おられた堎合、審査報告の受理日から1か月以内に回答を提出する。回答をレビュヌした埌に、審査官が反察を維持した堎合、公聎䌚が予定される。たた審査官が回答を承諟した堎合、商暙は、受理され、Trade Marks Journal商暙ゞャヌナルで公瀺される。

異議

商暙が公瀺された埌、第䞉者は、商暙の公瀺日から4か月間延長䞍可、異議の通知を提出できる。異議の通知が提出されれば、出願者は、異議の通知が送達された日付から2か月以内延長䞍可にこれに反論する必芁がある。出願者による反論埌、盞手方は反論の通知が送達された日付から2か月以内延長䞍可に異議を裏付ける蚌拠を提出しなければならない。又は、この段階で蚌拠を匕甚せず、異議の通知の内容のみ䞻匵するこずもできる。その埌、出願者は盞手方の蚌拠提出、又は蚌拠䞍提出通知の受領から2か月以内延長䞍可に出願を裏付ける蚌拠を提出しなければならない。たたは、蚌拠を匕甚せず、反論の通知の内容のみ䞻匵するこずもできる。盞手方に察する出願を裏付ける蚌拠、又は蚌拠䞍提出の通知の送達埌、盞手方はその通知から1か月以内延長付加に答匁曞で蚌拠を提出するこずができる。蚌拠提瀺の段階が終了埌、登録官は䞡圓事者にヒアリングの通知を発行し、本案の刀決を行う。

登録

公瀺から4か月以内に、いかなる第䞉者にも異議がない堎合、商暙の登録が行われる。

修正取り消し

登録は、それが誀っお認められた堎合、及び又は法埋に違反しおいる堎合、取り消すこずができる。たた、登録の日付から5幎間䞀床も䜿甚されおいないこずを理由に取り消すこずもできる。

所有暩の倉曎及び暩利譲枡

譲枡

登録及び未登録商暙は譲枡するこずができる。商暙の譲枡は、その商暙が登録時に察象ずなった物品・サヌビスのすべお、又は䞀郚のいずれかに関しお行うこずができる。

䜿甚蚱諟

登録ナヌザヌの䜿甚蚱諟登録の蚘録の申請は、䜿甚蚱諟契玄の眲名日から6か月以内に提出する。

名矩及び䜏所倉曎

登録蚘録の敎理を行う商暙登録局に名矩倉曎ず䜏所倉曎の申請をする。

曎新

商暙は、申請日から10幎有効で、その埌10幎ごずに曎新する必芁がある。

必芁な情報曞類

出願:

1. 商暙の厳密な衚瀺

2. 出願者の名前、䜏所及び法的地䜍

3. 物品サヌビスの詳现

4. 出願者の眲名のある委任状(PoA)公蚌及び公認は必芁ない

5. 優先暩を䞻匵する堎合、優先暩の詳现及び優先暩蚌明曞ずその翻蚳蚌明曞付英蚳

6. ナヌザヌの䞻匵をする堎合最初に䜿甚した時の幎月日、及びこれを裏付ける蚌拠蚌拠による裏付けのあるヌザヌ宣誓䟛述曞は必須であるが、䜿甚の䞻匵をしない堎合、「䜿甚意図」に基づいお出願するこずができる

譲枡:

1. 眲名又は公蚌人の眲名のある譲枡蚌原本

2. 商暙ず譲枡における懞案䞭の蚎蚟がないこずを衚明する眲名及び公蚌人の眲名のある宣誓䟛述曞原本

3. 譲枡人の眲名のあるPoA

䜿甚蚱諟

1. 締結されたラむセンス契玄の原本又は公蚌人の眲名のあるコピヌ

2. ラむセンサヌ正匏な所有暩者所有者、又は正匏に暩限が䞎えられた代理人が提出する公蚌人の眲名枈み宣誓䟛述曞であり、以䞋を衚明するもの:

(a)正匏な所有暩者によっお蚱可された䜿甚がどの皋床管理されるかを瀺す詳现を含めた正匏な所有暩者ず登録ナヌザヌ予定者ずの関係既存の関係又は予定されおいる関係の詳现、及び登録ナヌザヌ予定者が単独の登録ナヌザヌであるかに぀いお、又は登録ナヌザヌずしお申請されるナヌザヌの人数に぀いお他の制限があるかに぀いお

(b)ラむセンシヌが登録ナヌザヌずしお登録される際に、その登録の察象ずなる物品、及び又はサヌビスの厳密な仕様

(c)物品、及び又はサヌビスの特性に぀いお条件又は制限ある堎合、蚱可された䜿甚方法又は堎所、及びその他あらゆる事項

(d)蚱可された䜿甚の厳密な期間、又は期間無制限かに぀いおの情報

3. ラむセンサヌずラむセンシヌの眲名のあるPoA

名矩倉曎:

1. 名矩倉曎を蚌明する任意の蚌明曞(䟋登蚘簿謄本の認蚌コピヌ)

2. 暩利所有者の新名称が蚘茉された眲名枈みPoA

䜏所の倉曎:

1. 䜏所の倉曎を蚌明する任意の蚌明曞䟋 登蚘簿謄本の認蚌コピヌ

2. DD/MM/YYYYフォヌマット登録枈みの堎合のみで䜏所倉曎された日付

3. 所有暩者の新䜏所が蚘茉された眲名枈みPoA

曎新

1. 所有暩者の眲名のあるPoA

2. 執行

停造防止

停造防止は、所有暩者及び暩利保持者の商暙暩の執行の䞻芁な偎面の䞀぀である。「停造」ずは、むンドの刑法兞(IPC)の第28項でも定矩されおいるが、本来の意味は、類䌌性を利甚しお詐欺を実行する意図を持ちながら、又は詐欺が実行されるこずを知っおいながら、䞀぀のものを別のものに䌌せる行為である。さらに、停造においお、暡倣が粟巧であるこずは重芁ではない。たた、Illustration図解ず䜵せお参照するIPC第415項では、(b)詐欺行為は䞍正行為ずみなされ、最長1幎の犁固刑、眰金又はその䞡方が課せられるずしおいる。停造品の販売が、顧客及び取匕に関わるその他関係者及び䞀般垂民から違法収益をだたし取るこずを意図しおいるため、むンドの裁刀所は、そのような行為をIPC第420項に基づき、詐欺眪及び財産匕き枡しの䞍正な誘導ずしお認識し、眰金ず共に7幎の犁固刑を科しおいる。

たた、商暙法第102、103及び104項では、商暙の改ざん及び䞍正適甚に関する違反行為、刑眰及び蚎蚟手続きが定矩されおいる。これらの芏定では、停造眪に぀いお、6か月以䞊3幎以内の犁固刑及び50,000むンドルピヌ742米ドル以䞊、200,000むンドルピヌ2966米ドルたでの眰金を科すずしおいる。再犯及び环犯では、さらに長期の刑期ずより高額な眰金が科せられる。商暙法で定矩されおいる違反行為は裁刀暩内の犯眪であり、特定の地䜍にある譊察官は、犯眪者を什状なしで逮捕するこずができ、たた裁刀所の蚱可の有無に関わらず捜査を開始するこずができる。しかしながら、商暙法に基づき行われるいかなる行為に぀いおも、譊察官は、事前にその事件の事実に関し、商暙の登録官に意芋を求めなくおはならない。

囜境管理

むンド政府は、Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 2007幎知的所有暩茞入品執行に関する芏定に基づき、知財所有者がむンド囜境で自身の知財暩を執行するこずができるずしおいる。そのためには、商暙知財暩の登録を有効にしおいるこずが必須である。皎関で受けられる保護期間は、皎関で暩利が蚘録されおから幎、又は商暙知財暩の効力満了時のどちらか早いほうずなる。5幎の満了埌、 暩利保持者は、新たに通知を提出しなければならない。

暩利䟵害パッシング・オフ

商暙法に基づき、むンド囜内の登録商暙の正匏な所有暩者又は登録ナヌザヌは、叞法暩を持぀地方裁刀所に登録商暙の暩利䟵害に぀いお民事蚎蚟の提蚎をするこずができる。デリヌ、ムンバむ、チェンナむ及びコルカタの倧郜垂圏で生じる暩利䟵害に関する蚎蚟では、それらの郜垂の圓該高等裁刀所に提蚎するこずも可胜である。停造物品の茞入販売も暩利䟵害ずなるため、効果的な差し止めを求める刑事蚎蚟ず合わせお民事蚎蚟を暩利䟵害者に察し起こすこずができる。さらに、芞術䜜品が䞻題ずしお含たれる商暙暩䟵害及びパッシング・オフの蚎蚟では、暩利保持者による圓該芞術品の著䜜暩䟵害の申し立おは、著䜜暩法の執行可胜な芏定を発動するこずになるので、有益である。民事蚎蚟䞋で提䟛される救枈には、暫定的・恒久的差止呜什、䞍圓収益匁枈金又は賠償金、䟵害しおいるラベル商暙の砎棄又は抹消などをするための抌収が含たれる。適切な蚎蚟では、むンドの裁刀所は、有効な差し止めのために、正匏な暩利保持者に察し1000䞇ルピヌ 146,920米ドルの懲眰的損害賠償金の支払いを裁定するこずに躊躇しない。民事蚎蚟を受け入れおいる裁刀所は、委員を名又は耇数名任呜し、被告の事業所を抜き打ちで立ち入り怜査させ、法廷財産ずしお被告による保護預かりずするために停造物品の䞀芧を䜜成させるこずができる。これが意味するこずは、委員によっお物品が蚘録されたら、被告は、その物品を圓該民事裁刀所からの蚱可を埗るこずなく、いかなる第䞉者に察しおであろうず取匕又は販売するこずができないずいうこずである。停造されおいる商暙がむンドで登録されおいない堎合、か぀、商暙が関連する垂堎においお十分な信甚ず評刀を有する堎合、商暙法の第27(2)項、第134 項及び第135項に基づいおパッシング・オフに関する民事蚎蚟を起こすこずができる。パッシング・オフの蚎蚟で提䟛される救枈は暩利䟵害の蚎蚟ず同䞀である。

以䞊

Omesh Puri パヌトナヌ

omesh-puri.jpg

 

Omesh Puri is a partner with LexOrbis and heads the trademark, design and copyright practice of the firm with over 11 years' experience. He has undertaken a wide array of assignments in prosecution and enforcement of intellectual property rights and regularly advises on complex commercial and IP transactions and has noteworthy experience in representing clients before the Intellectual Property Appellate Board and IP offices. His current focus, along with IP prosecution and contentious matters, is providing advisory services to the technology and media and entertainment sectors including on transactional aspects.

He is responsible for large IP portfolios from various industries including pharmaceuticals, foods and beverages, computer software, fashion, automobiles, liquor etc. He has authored several articles and has spoken on various IP issues at national and global conferences.

Omesh Puri はLexOrbisのア゜シ゚むト・パヌトナヌで、11幎を超える経隓を有し、同瀟の商暙、意匠、および著䜜暩に関する業務の䞻任担圓者です。Puriは、知的財産暩の出願手続きず法的執行に関する幅広い業務経隓があり、耇雑な商取匕や知財取匕に぀いお定期的に助蚀を行い、たた特筆すべき経隓ずしお、the Intellectual Property Appellate Board知的財産控蚎委員䌚および各知財関連機関に察しクラむアントの代理を務めたこずがありたす。珟圚は、知財の出願手続きおよび玛争に関する案件に加え、テクノロゞヌ、メディアおよび゚ンタヌテむンメントの分野においお、取匕面での助蚀を含めた顧問業務を行うこずに泚力しおいたす。

Puriは、医薬品、食品・飲料、コンピュヌタヌ・゜フトりェア、アパレル、自動車、酒類などの様々な業界から䟝頌された倧型知財ポヌトフォリオを扱っおいたす。たた、いく぀か著曞があり、倚様な知財問題に぀いお囜内倖の䌚議で講挔しおきたした。


Amaya Singh パヌトナヌ

amaya-singh.jpg

 

Amaya is a partner and heads the overall operations of the firm. With over 15 years of experience in trademarks, she has acquired expertise in all areas of trademark law, including national and international filings, prosecution, assignments, recordals, renewals, oppositions and cancellation actions. She regularly advises clients on allied areas of trademark enforcement, such as brand protection and domain name acquisition. Amaya is also in charge of the Group for Research, Publications and Programs at LexOrbis.

Amaya Singhはパヌトナヌずしお、事務所党䜓の運営に携わっおいたす。商暙業務で15幎以䞊の経隓を有し、囜内倖の申請曞出願から、出願手続き、譲枡、登録、曎新、異議申し立お、取消蚎蚟にいたる商暙法のあらゆる分野の専門知識を獲埗しおいたす。商暙保護及びドメむン名獲埗などの商暙執行に関連する分野でクラむアントに定期的に助蚀をしおいたす。たた、LexOrbisで調査、出版及びプログラム郚門を担圓しおいたす。


more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Johnson & Johnson won’t enforce patents for bedaquiline after months of public scrutiny and new licences for generics
We have published this year’s Corporate IP Stars list, an annual rankings publication which recognises senior in-house practitioners
The 2023 edition of Managing IP’s Rising Stars publication is now available online
Allison M Hester, attorney at Moye White, outlines Mattel's litigation history and explains what trademark lessons brands can learn from the toy company
The former BoA president won a high-profile race to succeed Christian Archambeau as executive director in July
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP professional about their life and career
Van Anh Le, assistant professor in IP law at Durham University, assesses the US-Vietnam partnership and the potential implications for Vietnam's IP landscape
Civil society and industry representatives met in Geneva on Thursday, September 28 to discuss a potential expansion of the TRIPS waiver
Sources say the beta version of the USPTO’s new trademark search tool is a big improvement over the current system but that it isn’t perfect
Canadian counsel weigh in on the IP office’s decision to raise trademark filing fees in 2024 and how they’re preparing clients