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 21,799 results that match your search.21,799 results
  • According to Turkish IP law, there is no distinction whatsoever between famous, or highly reputed marks, and well-known marks. The law simply refers to well-known marks as one single concept.
  • China's economy is fast developing - and many people fear that IP protection cannot keep up. International investors are concerned about effective enforcement, while domestic companies seek a strong environment for developing IP rights and negotiating on issues such as standards. MIP and Finnegan Henderson jointly hosted a roundtable discussion in Beijing last month to discuss how these issues can be addressed. Read the full, unabridged transcript exclusively here on managingip.com.
  • For PCT applications that have an international filing date on or after July 1 2004 and which enter the national phase in Singapore under Chapter I, one of the search and examination procedures available is to file a statement saying that the applicant wishes to rely on the international preliminary report on patentability (IPRP) of the PCT application and proceed to grant. In other words, Chapter I cases can rely on the IPRP for grant, thereby avoiding the need to request local examination in Singapore.
  • Law 23/2006, of July 7, which amends the consolidation of the 1996 Copyright Act, was published on July 8 2006 in the Official Gazette of the Spanish state.
  • The issue of improving the Russian legislation in the field of intellectual property has long been on the agenda. Ever since the new versions of IP laws were adopted in 2002-2003 (the Russian Copyright law was amended in 2004) there was much discussion about further improvements. In fact, the amendments of three years ago did not solve all the problems though they did make some good patches over the legislative gaps. The work continued and by 2006 there were prepared numerous proposals for the patent and trade mark laws.
  • The District Administrative Court in Warsaw (Case VI SA/Wa 1482/09) confirmed the view of the Patent Office of the Republic of Poland that a single colour per se does not have distinctive character, but that this obstacle to registration as a trade mark may be eliminated by acquired distinctiveness.
  • A judgment in the unsuccessful trade mark opposition brought by Rotary International (RI) against Carl Bird, proprietor of the trade mark Rotary Engine, has issued.
  • A recent Italian legislative decree to relaunch the economy includes tax relief measures related to patents, trade marks and know-how. This decree increases the deductible amortization rate for the costs of the right to use original works, patents, processes, formulas and information related to experience acquired in the field of industry, commerce and science from 33% to 50%.
  • The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines, IPOPhil, officially launched its new service called TM Online on April 25 2006. After encountering some initial problems, TM Online became available to the public in May 2006. This project is not new. As early as November 26 2004, IPOPhil issued Office Order No. 25 Series of 2004, amended by Office Order No. 42, providing for the rules on the trade mark electronic filing system. However, its implementation was deferred following demand from practitioners for clearer rules. The following are the requirements for using TM Online:
  • Business method patents, granted for particular business models unique to a particular organization, have been the subject of mounting interest and controversy among business leaders in the digital media, internet and e-commerce sector.