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.

Thursday, 25 July 2013

Thursday thingies

Time for a Nice Notification. The IPKat's friends at the World Intellectual Property Organization have made him very happy by issuing a media release, Nice Notification No. 132, which bears the happy tidings that the Government of New Zealand, on 16 July 2013, deposited its instrument of accession to the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks, as variously amended, improved, upgraded and generally refreshed. The instrument in question contained a rare and unusual declaration that goes like this:
"Consistent with the constitutional status of Tokelau and taking into account the commitment of the Government of New Zealand to the development of self government for Tokelau through an act of self determination under the Charter of the United Nations, this accession shall not extend to Tokelau unless and until a Declaration to this effect is lodged by the Government of New Zealand with the Depositary on the basis of appropriate consultation with that territory".
The Nice Agreement, as revised and amended, will enter into force, with respect to New Zealand, on 16 October 2013. Until then, the IPKat wonders, and indeed thereafter, how will the good folk of Tokelau be classifying their goods and services for the purpose of trade mark registration? Does anyone know?  Merpel adds: Tokelau has a population of just 1,411 -- only 100 more than the number of staff who work in WIPO's Geneva headquarters.  That's just over 31 people for each Nice Class.

 
Muggins demonstrates
the best way to get stuck
into a good Greek yoghurt
Around the blogs.
The jiplp weblog features IPKat blogger Jeremy's editorial, "Picking out the bad boys", here.  In the light of Leigh Smith's current intelligence note on the Greek Yoghurt/Greek Style Yoghurt dispute in Fage v Chobani (here), the same blog is holding a "What do the words 'Greek Yoghurt' mean to you?" sidebar poll, which you can check out here.  There's plenty going on in the 1709 Blog too: from Mira comes "Crime without a Remedy" -- a powerful piece on the artist's position when his artwork is set aflame. Estelle Derclaye also asks some questions concerning collective rights managements. Can you help her? This Kat certainly hopes so.  Class 46 reports that MARQUES is looking for a webmaster, an ideal post for someone who loves trade marks, understands websites and is already drawing a pension or looking for adventure.


It is no secret that the United Kingdom is hatching an Intellectual PropertyBill which might, in the fullness of time, all things being equal, become the Intellectual Property Act. The publication of this Bill has triggered an outcome which appears quite unrelated to its content, but never mind: it appears that the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (OPC) is currently conducting a survey into the usefulness of explanatory notes [brief explanation: UK legislation is accompanied by explanatory notes which range from the helpful to whatever the opposite of helpful is. These notes are not legally binding and are not used in interpretation, but can be useful if they say things like "This Act transposes the XYZ Directive into UK law"].  The OPC welcomes views from stakeholders, who are invited to access the survey here.  Says Merpel, if the OPC really welcomes views from stakeholders, it wouldn't get the IPO Designs Review Team to send this out on a sunny afternoon in the middle of the holiday period and give just one short week for people to respond (the survey closes at the end of the month).

2 comments:

Elena Szentivanyi, Henry Hughes Patent & Trade Mark Attorneys said...

Interesting question but it seems unclear whether the NZ trade marks legislation even extends to Tokelau in the first place.

The NZ 1953 Act specifically extended to Tokelau but that Act was repealed in 2003 and therefore the 1953 Act is no longer in force in Tokelau.

Generally, New Zealand cannot and does not legislate on behalf of Tokelau unless authorised or requested to do so. It was never the intention of the New Zealand Government or Tokelau for the Trade Marks Act 2002 to apply to Tokelau.

Therefore there is a bigger issue than how the good folk of Tokelau will be classifying their goods and services as it seems that there is no trade mark protection in Tokelau in the first place!

Jeremy said...

Dear Elena and Co -- thanks so much for your observations.

Did NZ have the power to repeal the 1953 Act in respect of Tokelau?

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

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