LATEST TRADEMARK REPORTER


The November-December issue of The Trademark Reporter has reached these shores and the IPKat’s paws and is packed with goodies such as:
* a comparison of trade mark dilution law in the EU and US by renowned US expert J Thomas McCarthy (full text of article available here)
* a discussion of the relationship between trade mark protection for the configuration (trade dress) of goods and the need for competition on the market by Jerre B Swann and Michael J Tarr
* a piece on where there is a need for a separate right of publicity in the US by Barbara A Solmon
* a paper on the role of inference in establishing the state of mind of consumers when looking for the likelihood of confusion by William E Gallagher and Ronald C Goodstein PhD

Musical instruments: the next battleground for trade dress?
* a consideration of trade dress rights in musical instruments (with lots of lovely pictures!) by Robert M Kunstadt and Ilaria Maggioni
* a discussion of proof of irreparable harm in Canadian practice by Ruth M Corbin PhD
* a discussion of German comparative advertising by Andrea Lensing-Kramer and Peter Ruess
* discussion of Jerome Gilson’s proposal for various amendments to the Lanham Trade Mark Act by Keith M Stolte and a response by Jerome Gilson
* discussion of Dr John Liefield’s proposals regarding survey evidence of consumer confusion by A David Morrow and Ruth M Corbin and a response by John Liefeld

The IPKat says, it might take you until next Christmas to read all of these, but at least you’ll have fun in the process.
LATEST TRADEMARK REPORTER LATEST TRADEMARK REPORTER Reviewed by Anonymous on Wednesday, January 19, 2005 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.