Search results for

In a guest post, IEEE Managing Director Konstantinos Karachalios responds to criticisms of its updated patent policy

Questions from some Supreme Court justices in oral arguments in TC Heartland v Kraft suggested a desire to overturn the Federal Circuit on patent venue. Natalie Rahhal analyses the issues discussed and likely outcomes of the case

A bill that would require that the head of the US Copyright Office is a presidential nominee has been approved by the US House of Representatives judiciary committee. Bob Goodlatte, the committee’s chairman, says this is “the first initial legislative step” of wider copyright reform

In German, Peter Stiefel’s last name means “boot”. The boot fits; at the MARQUES panel on defending luxury brands last week, Stiefel seemed by far the most gung-ho of the speakers, and the most willing to kick down doors in search of counterfeits

Cases of counterfeiting, IP infringement and low-standard goods handled by MSD Vietnamese authorities have stepped up their efforts to enforce IP rights in recent years, particularly in 2016, and especially in the area of combating counterfeit goods.

Section 10 of the Lanham Act contains an anti-trafficking rule which prohibits the assignment of an intent-to-use-based trade mark application except where such assignment is to a successor to the business of the applicant or portion thereof to which the mark pertains. This provision played a key role in a decision recently rendered by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Emerald Cities Collaborative, Inc v Sheri Jean Roese. This ruling serves as an important reminder about the laws prohibiting the assignment of intent-to-use based trade mark applications, the risks in pursuing enforcement efforts when a mark might not have been properly assigned and the importance of asserting common law rights in a notice of opposition.

In Thailand, the leading ground for trade mark rejections is the finding of descriptiveness. Much to the dismay of applicants, descriptiveness rejections at times differ from findings in other trade mark offices. For example, some examiners reject applications when they are descriptive of anything, as opposed to using the more internationally accepted criteria where marks should only be rejected on descriptiveness grounds if they merely describe a characteristic of the goods or services specified in the application.

Apple has had its trade mark Sherlock revoked by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore in a recent case which reinforces the need for trade mark owners to establish evidence of genuine use of their mark – or risk losing it.

In the past, although the IP Office recognised the fame enjoyed by popular movies, such recognition did not render these titles to be famous marks by default. Nowadays, considering that the production companies of well-received movies or TV shows are apt to release many tie-in products and that a box office hit often promises high public awareness, the IP Office has made it clear in Article 4.7 of the Examination Guidelines on Distinctiveness of Trade Marks that "[t]he titles of works, including books, films, and dramas, shall be deemed to have acquired their distinctiveness if, after extensive exposure, they have implanted a vivid impression in the minds of consumers". On this score, the copyright owners or parties with the copyright owner's consent are entitled to register such titles as trade marks.

As Turkey is a member of EPC, any provision of the EPC has the power of national law and can be directly applicable for European patents validated in Turkey. However as is well known, the EPC does not have many provisions binding the national courts. One of them is Article 138/3 which gives the European patent owner the right to limit the patent in the event of an invalidation action and orders the national court to take the limited version of the patent as the basis of invalidation proceedings.