Search results for

The question of whether a trade mark licensee should be recorded as a registered user (RU) has often been posed to trade mark practitioners where there are cost versus benefit considerations. The costs are filing fees, which are compounded by the need to make fresh applications whenever the trade marks concerned are renewed. In the Malaysian context, it has always been thought that two main benefits arise from such recordals. The first would be that the use by the RU would be deemed as use by the registered owner. The second is the right of the RU to sue for trade mark infringement, if certain conditions are met.

The Swiss Federal Administrative Court in a recently published decision refused to grant a request for a stay of opposition appeal proceedings, even though the validity of the opposition plaintiff's trade mark had been challenged in a civil court nullity action brought by the opposition defendant.

Article 85.1.2 of the old Patent Law provided: When a patentee claimed damages, he could calculate his loss according to the profits gained by the infringer from his infringing act; where the infringer was unable to provide documentation proving the costs or other necessary expenses, the total sales of the infringing article should be deemed to be the infringer's profits.

On May 7 1997, Caterpillar Inc, a US company, filed two trade mark applications for its marks Caterpillar and design and Cat and design covering goods in class 14, such as watches, clocks, cuff links and tie tacks. On December 11 and 12 2002, Manolo P Samson, a Filipino businessman, filed his opposition against Caterpillar's trade mark applications.

The US Patent and Trademark Office's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) provides, among other things, a forum for trade mark owners to oppose the issuance of a certificate of registration for a mark filed by a third party which it believes is confusingly similar to its registered mark. Although the TTAB can issue a decision as to whether two marks are confusingly similar such that one of them should not be entitled to registration, the issue of whether one mark infringes another is beyond the scope of a TTAB proceeding and is instead left to the courts.

Inventors of LCDs, USB, nanotechnology, pyrosequencing, furniture doors and train wheels were recognised at the EPO European Inventor Award 2013 held in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

The Supreme Court delivered a mixed ruling in the Myriad case in June, finding that some parts of the biotech company's patents on genes linked to breast and ovarian cancer can be patented while others cannot. The court unanimously ruled that isolated and purified DNA was a product of nature and therefore not eligible for patent protection under Section 101. But it said that synthetically created complementary DNA (cDNA) can be patented because it is not a naturally occurring substance.

Precedent set for copyright harmonisation Second WIPO treaty in 14 months Stevie Wonder makes last-minute appearance Groups representing blind people welcomed a new WIPO deal last month on accessing printed and audio material, claiming that it represents "a shift in power in global negotiations on intellectual property rights".

“[This decision] departs from the settled approach separating patent and antitrust law”

White House issues recommendations FTC launches investigation ITC announces pilot programme June was a bad month for US patent trolls, PAEs or whatever they want to be called. The White House issued a proposal for new laws and regulations, boosting existing bills in Congress, while the FTC announced an investigation and the ITC launched its own pilot programme to tackle them.