For the half-year to 31 December 2014, the IPKat's regular team is supplemented by contributions from guest bloggers Rebecca Gulbul, Lucas Michels and Marie-Andrée Weiss.

Regular round-ups of the previous week's blogposts are kindly compiled by Alberto Bellan.

Friday, 13 January 2006

BEAR'S BIRTHDAY



Today is the 80th birthday of Michael Bond, creator of that marmalade sandwich-eating ursine superstar and all-round English/darkest Peruvian eccentric Paddington Bear.

The IPKat reckons that the following questions need to be answered for the piece of mind of IP lawyers everywhere:

*Is the recipe for Paddington Bear’s marmalade sandwiches protected as confidential information? Does their composition give right to an Art.8 claim under the Human Rights Act?

*During his lifetime, PB has had many facelifts (his official website lists 8). Would the use of any one of those images be sufficient to maintain the trade mark rights in all of the other images? A related question – does the use of an image of Paddington Bear wearing Wellington boots constitute use in a form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character of the mark when compared to Paddington without his wellies for the purposes of avoiding revocation?


*Is the mark PADDINGTON BEAR prima facie barred from registration since it (i) is descriptive of a bear who arrived or is from Paddington or (iii) includes a geographical term that other traders may need to use.

4 comments:

Guy said...

PADDINGTON BEAR is already registered in the UK Trade Marks Registry in one class (28) and as a Community Trade mark in ten classes; both registrations are for the words alone.

Ilanah said...

Indeed yes, but was the name inherently distinctive or was the distinctiveness acquired?

Richard Gallafent said...

There are other curious questions perhaps not quite so IP focussed but which may have IP implications, for example in terms of enabling disclosure. I have in mind particularly the question of how, following its removal from under the hat, the delectable comestibles stored for emergencies remained hair-free - as one must assume they did or there would have been some indication of distaste from its intended recipient - and presumed ultimate consumer.

I think we should be told.

Michael Harman said...

"the piece of mind of IP lawyers everywhere". Are you suggesting that IP lawyers lack a complete mind?

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

Just pop your email address into the box and click 'Subscribe':