The team is joined by GuestKats Mirko Brüß, Rosie Burbidge, Nedim Malovic, Frantzeska Papadopolou, Mathilde Pavis, and Eibhlin Vardy
InternKats: Rose Hughes, Ieva Giedrimaite, and Cecilia Sbrolli
SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Hayleigh Bosher (Book Review Editor), and Tian Lu (Asia Correspondent).

Sunday, 10 December 2006


The IPKat learns from Engadget of a new spate of berry-inspired litigation. RIM has filed a claim in Los Angeles, arguing that Samsung’s BlackJack handset infringes RIM’s BlackBerry trade mark.

The IPKat doubts whether there would be any confusion, but he suspects that it’s more than coincidental that Samsung has chosen, of all the possible names, one beginning with the word ‘black’. Having said that, while unfair advantage is actionable in the EU, it isn’t in the US.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

If IPSEI and PEPSI are likely to be confused under 5(2) (see Registry decision), then they may well have no need of an unfair advantage cause. These days 5(2) seems to be as elastic as the courts want it.

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

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