ALL QUIET ON THE TÜRKPATENT FRONT
Kluwer Trademark Blog
by Ozlem Futman (Ofo Ventura Intellectual Property & Litigation)
8h ago
For some time, brand owners and practitioners in Turkey have been waiting for three things to be moved forward before TÜRKPATENT, namely (1) administrative non-use cancellation proceedings, (2) an updated 2024 PTO fee schedule and (3) a new edition of entry exam to the profession. However,  TÜRKPATENT has been remarkably silent. Here is a summary of what has been going on. ADMINISTRATIVE NON-USE CANCELLATION The Turkish IP Code no 6769 (the Code) entered into force on 10 January 2017. In short the Code was saying that TÜRKPATENT’s (the PTO) authority to handle non-use cancellation claims ..read more
Visit website
Basmati: The UK perspective
Kluwer Trademark Blog
by Julius Stobbs (Stobbs IP) and Emma Pettipher (Stobbs IP)
1w ago
We UK lawyers view with interest the developments in the “Brexit cases”, resulting in appeals to the CJEU in 3 cases, as discussed in various previous posts on this blog, the latest being the summary (here) of the AG opinion in the first case, BASMATI. The BASMATI case, and the related “Brexit cases” APE TEES and SHOPPI, are of particular interest to UK practitioners not because the facts relate to the aftermath of Brexit, but because fundamentally they all will in the end, we hope, confirm the answer to the question “What is the relevant date for the purposes of assessment of relative grounds ..read more
Visit website
Trademark News: What you might have missed in January 2024
Kluwer Trademark Blog
by Kluwer IP Reporter
2w ago
All trademark news that you might have missed last month in one convenient overview. Read up on the latest news reported by the Kluwer IP Reporter. Andean manual for trademark examination revised In a joint effort, the General Secretariat of the Andean Community and the World Intellectual Property Organization have recently renewed the manual for trademark examination in the Andean countries of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. Read the full story here Australia adopts Madrid Goods and Services list The Intellectual Property office of Australia (IP Australia) has announced its transition f ..read more
Visit website
Audi vs. aftermarket – CJEU had the last say
Kluwer Trademark Blog
by Agnieszka Sztoldman (Osborne Clarke, University of Wrocław)
3w ago
On 25 January 2024 the CJEU issued the long-awaited judgement in the already famous AUDI case (C-334/22). This judgment confirms the possibility of Audi trade mark infringement in terms of the legal interpretation which will be further determined by a national court. EUTM No 000018762 The court ruled in AUDI’s favour, stating that a car manufacturer can prohibit the use of a sign identical or similar to its trade mark for spare parts. I discussed the background and preliminary questions raised by the Polish IP Court in Warsaw here. In the judgement, the CJEU confirmed that: first, the repair c ..read more
Visit website
BASMATI – or: Back into the Past?
Kluwer Trademark Blog
by Verena von Bomhard (BomhardIP)
1M ago
On AG Szpunar’s Opinion in Case C-801/22 P BASMATI was the first of the appeals to the CJEU in the three „Brexit cases“. The other two are APE TEES (EUIPO v Nowhere, C-337/22 P) and SHOPPI (Shopify v EUIPO, C-751/22 P, see here and here)). The CJEU allowed all three appeals to proceed, and in BASMATI, AG Szpunar issued his opinion on 23/11/2023. On BASMATI and APE TEES, we commented here, here, and here. In short, in BASMATI, Indo European Foods’ opposition to the EUTM application for the sign shown above based on UK passing-off rights failed before the EUIPO Board of Appeal (BoA) in April 20 ..read more
Visit website
Trademark News: What you might have missed in December 2023
Kluwer Trademark Blog
by Kluwer IP Reporter
1M ago
All trademark news that you might have missed last month in one convenient overview. Read up on the latest news reported by the Kluwer IP Reporter. EUIPO adopts CP13, CP14 Common Practices In November 2023 the management board of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) adopted the CP13 Common Practice (Trade mark applications made in bad faith) and the CP14 Common Practice (Trade marks contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality). It has also approved the launch of the CP16 Common Practice (Signs describing the subject matter of goods and/or services). Read ..read more
Visit website
2023 GC practice in retrospect (Part 2)
Kluwer Trademark Blog
by Verena von Bomhard (BomhardIP)
1M ago
Part 1 of this year’s retrospective provided a general overview over the GC case law from 2023 with numbers and a special focus on genuine use cases. Part 2 now focuses on weak marks. The reader is asked for forgiveness for the unusual length of this post… On social media (in particular LinkedIn), one could get the impression that in 2023, the GC was correcting the course of the overprotection of weak (elements in) marks – but the numbers do not confirm this. We have identified 26 cases that turned on whether seemingly weak common elements led to a likelihood of confusion (LOC), with a 50:50 ..read more
Visit website
YIPPIE! for YUPPIE – 2023 GC practice in retrospect (Part 1)
Kluwer Trademark Blog
by Verena von Bomhard (BomhardIP)
1M ago
The year is ending and so it is time, once again, to look at what has been coming out of the General Court (GC) over the past 12 months. While the numbers here are only approximate, resulting from searches on the Curia website and on Darts-ip, they do give an idea of what the GC has been up to. 2023 brought almost 300 decisions in total involving the EUIPO, 230 of which concerned trademarks, with more than 180 substantive judgments and 45 judgments and orders focusing on procedure. Of the procedural decisions, 25 followed settlements between the parties and 12 concerned costs. The remainder c ..read more
Visit website
Denmark: The Supreme Court finds no infringement of the “TREK” trademark
Kluwer Trademark Blog
by Lasse Skaarup Christensen (Gorrissen Federspiel) and Kathrine Spinner Madsen (Gorrissen Federspiel)
2M ago
In October 2023, the Danish Supreme Court ruled in a trademark case concerning the trademark “TREK”.  In recent years the Danish Supreme Court has rarely dealt with trademark disputes (due to the relatively strict requirements of leave from the Appeals Permission Board to appeal a decision to the Supreme Court), making this case particularly interesting. The case centered around T. Hansen Gruppen A/S (“T. Hansen”), a Danish retail entity, accused of infringing the trademark “TREK” owned by the American bicycle and cycling components manufacturer, Trek Bicycle Corporation (“TBC”). TBC is t ..read more
Visit website

Follow Kluwer Trademark Blog on FeedSpot

Continue with Google
Continue with Apple
OR