Search results for

Shwetasree Majumder and Harsimran Kalra of Fidus Law Chambers consider whether it’s time for a legislative overhaul to stop the ambush marketing of sporting events

Thanks to recent patent reforms and its pending membership of the Madrid Protocol, India is firmly part of the global IP system. But, as DIPP joint secretary V Bhaskar tells James Nurton, the country remains sceptical of further harmonisation as it seeks to balance IP protection and development

Since Vietnam's entry to the WTO, member countries have grumbled about Vietnam's seemingly toothless enforcement of IP rights. In recent years, however, Vietnam has made a strong commitment to encouraging more foreign investment and protection of IP is at the foundation of this cause. A recent decision issued by the Copyright Office of Vietnam (COV) highlights the country's commitment to protecting IPRs and may offer some peace of mind to both foreign and domestic businesses.

When a party receives a notice letter from a trade mark owner making an allegation of trade mark infringement, one of the first steps that the party should take following receipt of the notice letter (after conferring with counsel) is to review any insurance policy which it may have to ascertain whether insurance coverage is available. Too often, parties simply assume that their insurance policy does not provide protection for claims of trade mark infringement and miss out on the benefits that they are paying their insurance companies to provide.

In a recent decision, the Federal Supreme Court has confirmed some important principles that are relevant for both plaintiffs and defendants in trade mark non-use cancellation actions.

Under section 30 of the Singapore Patents Act, an application may proceed to grant based on the grant of or final results of the search and examination of a corresponding application. As defined in section 2 of the Singapore Patents Act, a corresponding application is, inter alia, an application that is subject to a priority claim based on an application which is also the basis for a priority claim for the Singapore application.

The Romanian State Office for Inventions and Trademarks (SOIT) has rejected a national combined trade mark application Slims EA, filed for registration for products in class 34 "unprocessed, semi-processed or processed tobacco; tobacco products; cigarettes; cigars and cigarillos; cigarette filters/cigarettes; articles for smokers; matches/lighters and ashtrays for smokers that are not made of precious metals" due to the conflict with the previous national combined trademark Eve, registered for products in class 34 "tobacco, raw or manufactured including cigars, cigarettes, cigarillos, tobacco for roll your own cigarettes, pipe tobacco, chewing tobacco, snuff tobacco; tobacco substitutes (not for medical purposes); smokers' articles, including cigarette paper and tubes, cigarette filters, tobacco tins, cigarette cases and ashtrays not made of precious metals, their alloys or plated with such; pipes, pocket apparatus for rolling cigarettes, lighters; matches".

The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPPhil) is inviting comments from the public on its proposed amendments to the rules and regulations governing the proceedings in administrative complaints for violation of intellectual property laws (infringement, unfair competition, etc), as well as other suggestions. The IPPhil's objective is to shorten the time it takes to issue decisions.

In a recent copyright infringement case (April 2010) in Malaysia [Suit No D5 (IP)-22-1152-2005], the local high court carefully reviewed certain key facts and legal precedents to meticulously analyse and rule on some important aspects of copyright infringement.

Article 19, section VII of the Mexican Industrial Property Law establishes, inter alia, that methods of therapeutic treatment applicable to the human body and to animals shall not be considered as inventions; as a result, such methods are expressly excluded from patentability. However, under Mexican law and practice, there is no exclusion of the possibility for patenting a (new or known) substance or compound for any specific use in a method of therapeutic treatment, as long as such use is new and the claims directed to this kind of matter are written under the first medical use format (compound X for use as a medicament and/or in the treatment of condition Y), or under the subsequent medical use format, also named second medical use format or Swiss-type format (the use of a compound X for manufacturing a medicament for treatment of disease Y).