Search results for

Among the many challenges in enforcing IP rights in developing countries such as Vietnam, those that arise from violations occurring on the internet may be the most difficult to handle. However, an American entertainment production company's recent success in dealing with online copyright violations shows that progress can be made with the right strategy.

IP stakeholders from around the world agreed four Resolutions on patents, trade marks, copyright and trade secrets at the AIPPI World IP Congress in October. Sarah Matheson discusses each of them

As we have previously reported, one of the EPO's chemical boards of appeal has referred the issue of entitlement to partial priority to the Enlarged Board of Appeal. The case is pending before the Enlarged Board under reference G 1/15.

Contrary to the very strict approach at the EPO in the situation in opposition proceedings referred to as the inescapable trap (where the patentee is squeezed between Article 123(2) and Article 123(3) EPC), which almost exclusively leads to the revocation of a European patent, Germany's Federal Supreme Court (BGH) has established a more liberal practice of dealing with such a situation for national German patents (see in particular the BGH's decision Xa ZB 14/09 Winkelmesseinrichtung).

The multi-member Civil Court of Athens recently issued an interesting judgment regarding the criteria when comparing composite trade marks covering pharmaceutical products and consisting of words and coloured devices. The dispute in question referred to a main lawsuit filed against a Greek company regarding infringement of the famous trademark Aspiring. The plaintiff claimed that the colour combination of green and white with black lettering is widely recognisable by consumers as an essential element of its Aspiring product marking and that this combination is associated with the plaintiff. The infringing product was a pharmaceutical product for the relief of pain, antipyretics and analgesic which circulated in the market in a packaging bearing the colours green and white with black lettering and under a different word mark.

When it comes to protecting new technologies, it may be difficult to decide between trade secret and patent protection.

This is an action (IPV 10-2009-00007) for design patent infringement and unfair competition filed by Kawasaki Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Motors (Phils) Corp against Eastworld Motor Industries Corp. In April 2008, Kawasaki released its Fury 125 motorcycle, which bore its registered industrial designs (ID 3-2008-00715 and 3-2008-00718). Kawasaki later learned that Eastworld had manufactured and was selling motorcycles branded as Sapphire 125, which Kawasaki claimed bore and incorporated nearly all of Kawasaki's registered patent elements. Eastworld, on its part, alleged that contrary to Kawasaki's claims, the industrial design for Sapphire 125 is covered by the certificate of registration number 3-2009-000062 under its name, and that Kawasaki failed to file an adverse information to its design application when it was published. Thus, there can be no infringement for using and selling its own patented products.

In Dutch court practice, an appeal is of a devolutive nature, that is in appeal the case is reconsidered as a whole. However, in a recent interlocutory decision (November 3 2015, High Point v KPN), the Appeal Court in The Hague found that the patentee was not entitled to further limit his claims.

Brand owners often wish to seek cancellation of another party's registered trade mark for a range of legitimate reasons, such as unauthorised registration of the mark by a dealer or registration of a copycat mark by a third party. These issues can cause impediments to business and should be addressed without delay.

In September, in Adidas AG v Christian Fellowship Church, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) issued a non-precedential, but potentially instructive, opinion in which it sustained a petition for cancellation on the grounds of non-use. The case analysed whether sales of only a small number of goods by Christian Fellowship Church constituted "use in commerce" under the Trademark Act.