Search results for

Under the previous Korean Trade Mark Act, when a company filed a trade mark (mark B) that was similar to a prior trade mark registration (mark A) that had grounds for invalidation, as long as mark A was registered and valid when mark B was filed, mark B could not be registered because of its similarity to mark A. This applied even if mark A was invalidated after mark B had been filed. Therefore, in a case where mark B was rejected on the grounds of similarity to mark A, the company filing mark B had no choice but to first invalidate mark A, and then refile mark B.

The trade mark Pascal was registered in 2004. In 2005 the owner applied for the trade mark Pascal Søtt & Salt (Pascal Sweet & Salty) for restaurant services in class 43.

For over 11 years, Lucas and Peterson have been locked in a patent dispute over a portable saw mill. Lucas, an Australian company, was involved in the design and manufacture of outdoor machinery. Lucas' principal product was a grabber, which is a device for picking up logs. Peterson was a New Zealand company and its principal product was a portable saw mill that it sold mostly in Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands.

The battle between Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, the two of the largest companies in the global defence industry, reached a new level at the High Court in Malaysia last year. The argument was over the registration and use of the trade mark Paveway, a type of laser-guided bomb made by Raytheon in Malaysia.

Amendments to Japan's Copyright Act came into force in January this year. The changes are designed to promote the circulation of electronic copyrighted contents and comprise three parts: 1) amendments for freer use of copyrighted contents on the internet; 2) amendments to prevent circulation of copyright-infringing goods/contents; and 3) amendments to broaden the opportunities for disabled people to use copyrighted information.

On December 30 last year, the Ministry of Economic Development signed the public notices implementing the new National Innovation Fund, instituted last March by decree number 107. The aim of the Fund is to support innovative projects based on the economic use of IP rights, to reinforce the Italian patent and to assist its transferability.

Under the Copyrights Act 1957 copyright societies are authorised to grant licences for copyrighted works. No other person except the owner of the work or a copyright society can grant a licence. A copyright society has the task of collective management of the rights of the owners and furthers their interests to prevent infringement of their works, in India as well as abroad. As India is a member of international conventions, the copyright societies in India can have reciprocal arrangements with organisations in other countries for collection of royalties for use of Indian works in these countries. Again, the owners have to withdraw the licence bestowed on the copyright society without prejudice to the rights of the society. In India, copyright societies like IPRS, PPL, SCRIPT have been protecting and managing the rights of the owners for musical, sound recording and cinematographic works respectively.

Two recent decisions on three-dimensional chocolate product trade marks whet our appetite to compare them with each other and with more chocolate trade marks.

As of January 29 2010 the EPO has launched the so-called PCT Patent Prosecution Highway Pilot Programme with the USPTO and the JPO. The programme enable PCT applicants whose applications have been regionalised or nationalised before one or more of the three offices to have their patent application enter a fast track examination process, provided that another of the three offices has served as ISA and – where a demand was filed – as IPEA in the international phase. Moreover, the PCT application must contain claims that were deemed allowable in the international phase. To enter the fast track programme, the applicant must file a request and fulfil a series of requirements. The requirements for applications regionalised before the EPO are outlined here.

Following the implementation of the new Patent Law on October 1 2009, the new Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China were adopted by the State Council on December 30 2009 and came into force on February 1 2010. The changes made in the Regulations are quite extensive and a number of points are worth nothing.