TM "DISPUTANTS" ARE JUST GOOD SPORTS


Friend of the IPKat Daniel Greenberg has tipped the Kat off about an on-off dispute between the South African Rugby Union (SARU) and its publishing partner Highbury Safika Media. SARU is the proprietor of the SA RUGBY trade mark in Class 16 (which includes printed matter). Highbury presently publishes a magazine for SARU, and there were reports yesterday that the two companies had fallen out during negotiations to extend the contract. The alleged dispute was said to have centred over Highbury’s entitlement to use the SA RUGBY trade mark in its SA Rugby magazine. However, both companies have denied that the rumours are true, and they insist that relations remain amicable.

The IPKat reckons that there’s room for someone to write a good article on the IP implications of sports club/team-focused magazines, including issues such as: (i) whether consumers expect such magazines to be “official”; (ii) descriptive use of team names; (iii) inadvertent inclusion of trade marks in pictures e.g. though pictures of players wearing sponsored shirts; (iv) personality rights of players; (v) rights in fixtures lists, results etc and (vi) use and licensing of trade marks in Class 16 by sporting teams.

More on the story here
TM "DISPUTANTS" ARE JUST GOOD SPORTS TM "DISPUTANTS" ARE JUST GOOD SPORTS Reviewed by Unknown on Thursday, September 15, 2005 Rating: 5

2 comments:

  1. Nice blog with interesting topics. I have a website that offers alot of controversial topics here. Just go to the links page and look for "Video Reviews"

    ReplyDelete

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.