Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Search results for

There are 19,198 results that match your search.19,198 results
  • We all know that obtaining patent protection internationally requires considerable funds, the average probably being $ 5,000 per country. For an individual inventor this can be a lot of money. However, it can also tighten a company´ s budget since companies generally have to seek patent protection for more than one product. It has thus become standard practice to base the decision for international filings on an early examination report which may be obtained in the country of first filing. It has further become good practice to file an international (PCT) application before the end of one year after the first national filing, thereby claiming convention priority, instead of going directly national at the end of the priority year. If the applicant asks for an international preliminary examination (IPE), there will be a further indication about the chances of obtaining national patents prior to converting the international application into national original applications.
  • A geographical indication may be protected by registering it at the State Office for Inventions and Trade Marks, as per the Law no 84/1998 or as per the international conventions to which Romania is a part, only if there exists a close connection between the goods referred to and by the geographical indication and the place of origin thereof with regard to quality, reputation or other characteristics of the goods.
  • Legal relations concerning the protection of word trade marks in non-Roman script are regulated in Ukraine mainly by the Law "On the Protection of Rights to Marks for Goods and Services" (the Law) and the "Rules on Compiling, Filing and Examining an Application for Grant of a Certificate of Ukraine on a Mark for Goods and Services" (the Rules).
  • As the clock winds down for 1999, researchers in Denmark have to hurry if they want to keep their IP rights for their inventions. The Danish parliament passed a new act on May 25 1999 with effect from July 1 1999. This act applies to inventions made after January 1 2000, and gives an employer (the institution or university) the option to claim the IP rights for an invention made by an employee (the researcher).
  • The Polish Parliament (Seym) continues to work on improving the system of industrial property protection. It seems the long-lasting and thorough discussions on legal solutions which are to be introduced are coming to an end. However, it does not seem possible that the new Industrial Property Law will come into force on January 1 2000, as it was suggested by the Polish government. The above date of implementation of new regulations adapted to the standards of the European Union would be highly desirable because as from January 1 2000 Poland will be fully bounded by the TRIPs provisions.
  • Most EU countries have the experimental use exemption corresponding to Article 27(b) CPC in their patent acts. It states that: "The right conferred by the Community patent does not cover acts done for experimental purposes relating to the subject matter of the patented invention.
  • The BSA is declaring a 30-day truce on UK companies using illegal software, from March 6 2000. The campaign is offering free use of an auditing tool which will check for unlicensed software on company systems.
  • Trade mark dilution is an ever-expanding concept in the US.
  • European patents cannot be divided after grant. By contrast, national German patents can be divided during opposition and opposition appeal proceedings (Section 60 of the German Patent Act). The German Federal Court of Justice has considered the dividing of granted patents in a series of recent decisions and taken the following position.