Search results for

Mitsuko Miyagawa and Masahiko Ishida of TMI Associates outline Japan's efforts to stop infringing goods entering the market

Dhruv Anand of Anand and Anand explains why it is crucial for companies to take care of their brand

By virtue of a recent decision in the case No II GSK 305/06, the Supreme Administrative Court rejected an appeal filed by company T and maintained the Polish Patent Office's decision to invalidate the right holder's trade mark.

On March 5 the Italian Decree of the President Number 275 on copyright protection came into force. This decree amends a provision dating back to 1942 (the Italian Royal Decree Number 1369).

In the recent decision of Polo/Lauren Company LP v Ziliani Holdings Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 49, the Federal Court has closed off the capability of trade mark owners to shut down parallel importation of a genuine product using our Copyright Act.

On January 1 last year Unilever outsourced its trade mark prosecution work. Almost 18 months on, Katrina Burchell, the company's general trade mark counsel, told Emma Barraclough about the experience

Peter Ollier, Hong Kong

The case of Austin Nichols & Co, Incorporated D/B/A Pernod Ricard v Stichting Lodestar is an unreported Singapore High Court appeal case against the decision of the Registrar of trade marks for the trade mark applications of Wild Geese in Class 32 and 33 by Austin Nichols & Co, Incorporated D/B/A Pernod Ricard. The trial judge dismissed the appeals, holding that: the respondent's mark, Wild Geese was not confusingly similar to the appellant's Wild Turkey mark pursuant to section 8(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act; there was no likelihood of confusion between the marks Wild Turkey and Wild Geese; and the appellant did not make out a case of passing off under Section 8(7)(a) of the Trade Marks Act.

In Peru there are two regulations that forbid the registration of a trade mark when it infringes a copyright owned by a third party. One of these regulations is included in clause (g) of article 130 of the Legislative Decree 823 – Industrial Property Law, and the other is included in clause (f) of article 136 of Decision 486 – Common Regime regarding Industrial Property. These regulations state that the brand names consisting of a sign that may violate the IP rights or copyright of a third party or brand names that consist of titles of literary, artistic or scientific works that are the object of copyright protection may not be registered as trade marks.

Let us assume a European patent is granted and validated in Germany. The European patent claims priority of an earlier filed German priority application. This priority application becomes a patent and is still alive when the German part of the European patent is validated.