Search results for

This case is a dispute between two Turkish traders in foodstuffs in Austria. It is a case of trade mark opposition proceedings so that only the registered goods count and not the market fact that these food products are all "halal" (that is, according to Islamic food rules) since this is not reflected in the list of goods of the registrations. The latter fact might have had an influence on the consumer circles concerned.

Who really owns your intellectual property? Wherever in the world you are based, do not risk ignoring Germany’s Employee Invention Law, warn Matthias Weiden and Matthias Bornhäusser

Finally, the highly publicised case regarding the construction of the 49 storey residential condominium building called Torre de Manila (pictured) as marring the view of the statue of the Philippines' national hero Jose Rizal has come to an end. On April 25 2017, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for injunction filed by the Knights of Rizal (KOR), a "civic, patriotic, cultural, non-partisan, non-sectarian and non-profit organisation" against the developer DMCI Homes Inc, City of Manila, National Commission for Culture and the Arts, et al (GR No 213948). The petition was filed by KOR on September 12 2014 which argued that the completed Torre de Manila would "forever ruin the sightline of the Rizal Monument in Luneta Park" since it would "loom at the back and overshadow the entire monument, whether up close or viewed from a distance". The KOR also argued that the building is nuisance per se; and that the Rizal Monument as a National Treasure is entitled to full protection of the law.

On May 5 2017, the Thai Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) issued two announcements in regard to patent processes in Thailand: (1) Announcement on the Establishment of a List of International Search Authorities and International Preliminary Examining Authorities (No 2); and (2) Announcement on Fees for International Applications, International Searches, Delivery of International Applications and Late Payment of Fees.

Eminent Luggage Corporation, a renowned Taiwan-based company engaged in the design and manufacturing of luggage cases, filed a civil patent infringement lawsuit with Taiwan's IP Court against an infringer. In the lawsuit, the defendant challenged the validity of the design patent, arguing that another brand of luggage case manufactured in China had already adopted the very same trunk panel design prior to its filing date.

Efes Breweries International NV, a famous beer company, filed a trade mark application 2014735627 for Золотая Бочка Шаболовское (Golden Barrel from Shabolovka). The patent office examiner refused the application arguing that the claimed designation could not be registered because it contained the word "Shabolovka" which is a street in Moscow. According to the examiner, the presence of this word creates associations with Moscow while the applicant is located in the Netherlands. Thus, this designation could confuse consumers with regard to the producer of the goods, namely his location.

According to Article 59 of the Chinese Patent Law the specification and drawings related to a patent right may be used in claim construction. However, it has long been a question as to whether claims are to be construed based on claim language alone without referring to the specification and drawings, or whether the content of the specification and drawings shall be read to limit or otherwise be used to illustrate the scope of claims. In a recently decided case (number 2016-XingZai-70), the Supreme Court of China held that the content of the specification and drawings was not allowed to be read into the claims, and that claims were to be construed in a narrow sense.

Bad faith trade mark filings are not uncommon in Vietnam. In fact, bad faith is often included under the label of "dishonesty basis" as a ground for opposition or cancellation of a trade mark application/registration. Generally speaking, bad faith is deemed to occur when an applicant intentionally registers a trade mark to benefit from the goodwill and reputation associated with the trade mark of another owner.

On May 16 2017, Bill C-30, the bill to implement the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), received Royal Assent. The legislation contains a number of provisions amending the Canadian Trade-marks Act pertaining to geographical indications (GIs). In particular, the provisions expand GI protection in Canada beyond wine and spirits to agricultural products and food.

The recent case of IPC Global Pty Ltd v Pavetest Pty Ltd (No 3) [2017] FCA 82, provides a textbook example of how not to create a competitive start-up.