Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Search results for

There are 21,824 results that match your search.21,824 results
  • The law requires the use of a registered trade mark in Ukraine. To maintain a registration, a trade mark must be used in respect of the goods and/or services for which it has been registered. The definition of the effective use of a trade mark has been detailed to comprise sale, offering for sale, import and export of the goods bearing a trade mark. Otherwise the registration becomes vulnerable to cancellation upon request by a third party.
  • Counterfeiting is widely seen as a major challenge for IP owners wishing to protect their investment in R&D and marketing in China. The large counterfeiting market is a big problem for brand owners and will most likely remain so for a long time, in spite of the efforts of the Chinese government to strengthen brand owners' opportunities to enforce their rights in China.
  • Over the past three years, Turkish national registrations from international trade mark applications under the Madrid Protocol have increased by 30%, reaching 7,750 in 2005.
  • Act 29/2006, of July 26, on Guarantees for and Rational Use of Medicinal and Health Products, which supersedes and repeals the former Medicinal Products Act 1990, was published in the Official State Gazette on July 27 2006. The new Act amends Patents Act Article 52.1, which provides for the exceptions to patent rights, that is cases in which a patent is not effective. The wording is:
  • In view of the changes in the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) that will come into force on April 1 2007, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore recently issued a consultation paper which proposed concurrent changes to the Singapore Patents Act and Rules on April 1 2007 to align with the changes in the PCT. In addition, there is a repeal of provisions in the Singapore Patents Act dealing with restrictive covenants.
  • The Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (IPONZ) has released guidelines for patent claims covering methods of treatment and Swiss-style claims on its website (www.iponz.govt.nz). They have been issued in an attempt to give applicants some clarity about what may or may not be patentable. In its guidelines, IPONZ has said that each patent application will be considered on its merits and that the guidelines are simply that: guidelines.
  • On July 21 2006 the Polish Parliament was served with a proposal of changes to the Law on Industrial Property. The proposed changes refer to several aspects of IP protection in Poland, including procedural regulations regarding litigation proceedings before the Polish Patent Office. The potential implementation of the proposed changes will have a significant impact on the regulations concerning the provision of evidence in litigation proceedings before the Patent Office.
  • A recent decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) has sent some shock waves among IP lawyers in the Philippines. On June 4 2001, In-N-Out Burger Inc, a US corporation, filed an administrative complaint for unfair competition with damages before the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPPhil) against Sehwani Inc, owner of the Philippine registered trade mark In N Out, and its licensee Benita's Frites. On December 22 2003, the Bureau of Legal Affairs (BLA), the adjudicating body of IPPhil, issued a decision, which declared In-N-Out an internationally well-known mark owned by In-N-Out Burger. It cancelled the registration of Sehwani for the identical trade mark but held that there was no unfair competition. The Court agreed that Sehwani had used the mark in good faith and so denied the claim for damages. Both parties appealed the decision to the Director General of IPPhil, who modified the decision of the BLA by declaring the existence of unfair competition, and awarding damages of P1.2 million ($24,000) to In-N-Out Burger Inc.
  • One of the most frequent obstacles that the prosecution of a Mexican trade mark application has to confront is that it may be objected to by the examiner for being descriptive or not sufficiently distinctive to be registered as a trade mark, or that it is indicative of the goods or services that it intends to protect. These types of objection are included in the Mexican Industrial Property Law; however the number of official actions objecting to trade marks for these reasons has notoriously increased recently.
  • Malaysia and the US recently wrapped up the second round of negotiations in respect of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the two countries. This round took place in Washington DC. The first round was held from June 12 to 16 in Penang, Malaysia.