Search results for

The opponent in the case discussed in this article has owned the word mark SEVEN since 2009 and the word and design mark 7seven in a fancy script since 2014. He opposed the registration of the word mark ROOM SEVEN. All these marks were registered for identical goods in international Class 18 (bags). Among other reasons, the defendant stated that the word mark SEVEN was not used during the last five years and that he has used the mark ROOM SEVEN since 1995 in several European countries including Austria without problems. This conflict has already led to decisions in several countries. For example, the Cour d'appel de Paris did not see any danger of confusion in its decision of September 26 2017 since ROOM SEVEN will be seen by consumers as a combination in which the word SEVEN has no particular importance.

Performing trademark clearance searches should always be the first step taken prior to filing a trademark application, as they are an effective way of preventing legal risks before launching a brand.

Discovery of evidence and actions for determination of evidence are separately regulated under the Civil Procedural Law. Discovery of evidence is a preliminary step taken before any action on merits and it only serves to discover and record the evidence that may be relevant to an ongoing or future action on merits.

An application for a trademark no 2016739384 was filed by Chicago, a Russian beauty parlour from S-Petersburg.

Law 4605/19, enacted last week, introduced important amendments to Greek patent law and more specifically to the provisions relating to licences.

The Sudanese Trademark Office has announced an important jurisdictional change – the Appeal Committee of the Trademark Office has been dissolved and, in future, appeals against decisions of the registrar will go to the courts. A registrar's decision might, for example, be a refusal based on issues surrounding non-distinctiveness, or a refusal based on prior rights (in formal opposition proceedings).

In Korea, patent term extension (PTE) of a maximum of five years may be granted once for a patent covering a drug or agrochemical that has to obtain marketing approval after patent registration. According to Article 95 of the Korean Patent Act, however, the scope of protection during the extended period is limited only to the working of the patented invention in relation to products whose marketing approval was the basis for PTE.

On March 18 2019, China announced amendments to its laws on joint ventures and the Regulations on Administration of Technology Import and Export (TIER) with immediate effect. The changes took away some of the restrictions around cross-border technology transfers, delivering more freedom in contracts in future transactions. The announcement has attracted lots of attention from around the world as the rules are directly related to some of the claims in the US-China trade disputes. The changes may turn out to be beneficial to both Chinese and foreign companies in the long-run. We highlight the background and key changes below.

An analysis of judicial decisions rendered by the Malaysian courts suggest that parallel imports are lawful to some extent.

In response to the adoption of China's new foreign investment law, the China State Council promulgated decision no. 709, which revoked certain provisions of the Administration of Technology Import and Export Regulations (TIER), effective since March 18 2019. These changes address one of the biggest controversies in the US-China trade war and open up a window for free negotiation in cross-border technology transfers by lifting certain mandatory restrictions. The changes include deleting Article 24(3), Article 27 and Article 29 of the regulations.