Search results for

The Industrial Designs Law in Malaysia, which is governed by the Industrial Designs Act 1997 and the Industrial Designs Regulations 1999, is likely to be substantially changed in 2010 or 2011. There was no recorded amendment to the legislation in 2009. However this year, the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO) has initiated a review of the designs law with IP practitioners and industry practice groups.

Methods for treatment of the human body by surgery are generally excluded from patentability under Article 53(c) EPC. In decision G01/07, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) of the European Patent Office recently decided on a referral putting forward several questions concerning the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body by surgery, especially in a case where the treatment itself, although including a significant physical intervention on the body, is not of a curative nature per se.

For the first time, China has a specific law on tort. Passed on December 26 2009, the Tort Law will come into effect on July 1 2010.

In a series of recent cases, Australian Courts have substantially allowed the possibility of selling visually similar packaged products to those of famous brands.

The Taiwan Trade Mark Act stipulates that any mark identical with or similar to a mark registered or filed earlier by another shall be unregistrable. In assessing whether a junior mark is similar to a senior mark, the two marks are generally viewed in their entireties. However, in a recent opposition case, questions have arisen as to whether a junior mark incorporating several discrete components respectively similar to a series of senior marks will be deemed a similar mark and whether the form under which a senior mark is used in commerce will be considered in the assessment of likelihood of confusion.

Can the owner of an unregistered trade name sue for infringement? This was the main issue tackled by the Supreme Court in its decision issued on March 3 2010, in the case of Coffee Partners Inc vs San Francisco Coffee & Roastery, Inc (GR no 169504). Coffee Partners, a domestic corporation registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in January 2001, has a franchise agreement with Coffee Partners, a British Virgin Islands company organised in 1997, to operate coffee shops using the trade mark San Francisco Coffee. San Francisco Coffee and Roastery is also a domestic corporation engaged in the wholesale and retail sale of coffee, registered with the SEC in May 1995. It registered the business name San Francisco Coffee & Roastery Inc with the Department of Trade and Industry in June 1995, but not with the Intellectual Property Office (IPOPhil).

Kraft Foods Polska Spólka Akcyjna from Warsaw, the owner of the Prince Polo trade mark (R-148617) gave a reasoned notice of opposition to a final decision of the Patent Office on the grant of a a right of protection to the Marco Polo trade mark (R-174796) that was applied for by Zaklady Przemyslu Cukierniczego Mieszko SA for goods in class 30, mainly for pastry and confectionery.

The Mexican Trademark Office (IMPI) usually applies strict criteria concerning trade mark likelihood of confusion and distinctiveness. In order to determine marks' confusing similarity, examiners base their exam on an "analysis of the similarities", determining this from the existence of a common element and disregarding the marks' overall impression.

There are positive signs that the Supreme Court intends to treat trade mark pirates severely to protect Indonesia's reputation.

As was reported in the March 2010 edition of Managing IP, amendments to the Copyright Act of Japan came into force in January 2010. This article will highlight the reform to the ruling system (Saitei Seido system) that allows use of a copyrighted work, the owner of which is uncertain, under Article 67 of the Copyright Act.