Search results for

Regulation (EC) 1924/2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods defines the term "light/lite" and its permissible use. A matter of interpretation arises though due to the fact that the Greek text of this Regulation expressly provides for a definition that differs from the one appearing in all the other versions. In particular, the Greek version contains the explanation that "light/lite" is confined to products of "reduced calories", whereas such an explanation does not appear in the other versions of the same Regulation, where there is a broader requirement, according to which the indication at issue shall be accompanied by an indication of the characteristics, which make(s) the food "light/lite".

The Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights (DGIPR) has developed an e-filing system for copyright registration since mid-2014. According to the Indonesian Copyright Law No 28 of 2014, copyrights can be registered although the right itself exists only once the creation has been created. The registration of a copyright is only a supporting tool for the copyright owner to get their copyright recorded at the database of the DGIPR.

On March 25 2015, in Taiwan Kolin Corporation Ltd v Kolin Electronics Co, Inc (GR No 209843), the Philippine Supreme Court held that "whether or not the products covered by trade mark sought to be registered by Taiwan Kolin on the one hand and those covered by the prior issued certificate of registration in favour of Kolin Electronics, on the other, fall under the same categories in the Nice Classification (NCL) is not the sole and decisive factor in determining a possible violation of Kolin Electronics' intellectual property right....emphasis should be on the similarity of the products and not on the arbitrary classification or general description of their properties or characteristics"." The contending marks are shown below.

A recent IP perception survey commissioned by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) reveals that 4 out of 5 Singaporeans agree that it is important to protect intellectual property rights and the works of IP creators. They are aware that IP right infringement could give rise to legal penalties, and more than half of the respondents cited moral reasons as a key deterrent for not engaging in infringing activities. The household survey was conducted with the objective of measuring Singaporeans' awareness, attitudes and behavioural dispositions towards IP and issues relating to IP rights. These results were announced at a 2015 World IP Day Appreciation Event held in Singapore on April 23 2015.

A proposal to consider plain packaging for tobacco products was raised in Malaysia at the International Nicotine Addiction Conference in Kuala Lumpur on April 23 and 24 2015.

The Madrid System for the international registration of marks, governed by the Madrid Protocol, is gaining popularity across Southeast Asia. Several countries in the region are preparing to implement Madrid as part of their commitments toward regional integration via the ASEAN Economic Community, which will be created at the end of 2015.

On January 30 2015, the Ministry of Finance introduced Circular 13/2015/ TT-BTC guiding the implementation of regulations in the new Law on Customs on Customs enforcement against IP infringement. Circular 13 took effect on March 15 2015, and, in line with the new law, brought about changes to the border control measures that had been in place in Vietnam for the past decade. Two months into the new regime, it appears that these changes, though seemingly not substantial, have increased the transparency as well as the effectiveness of Customs enforcement.

The Bucharest Court of Appeal recently rendered a final decision in favour of Swarovski Aktiengesellschaft in a lawsuit against Bogdan Radulescu, the sole shareholder of the Romanian company B&B Marketing Online. The company traded jewellery, watches and pens under the Swarovski trade marks through the site www.crystalglamour.ro.

The Patent Office examined the appeal on the official action of the examiner who refused registration of a trade mark in application number 2012728603 with priority of August 17 2012 with regard to goods in class 9 and services in class 35.

In Ava Ruha Corp d/b/a Mother's Market & Kitchen v Mother's Nutritional Center Inc, the US Patent and Trademark Office's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) issued a precedential decision regarding a registrant's ability to assert a laches defence in a cancellation proceeding. The petitioner Ava Ruha, which owned a trade mark registration for the stylised mark, Mother's Market & Kitchen, had filed petitions to cancel trade mark registrations owned by the respondent for the marks, Mother's (stylized) and Mother's Nutritional Center, on the grounds of likelihood of confusion, fraud and dilution. In its answer, the respondent asserted the affirmative defence of laches; and the parties subsequently filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the laches issue.