|Deep thoughts: but are they good enough|
to present at the INTA Scholarship Symposium?
If you are thinking of having a go, send an abstract (approximately 300 words) describing a current trade mark or unfair competition scholarship project to project co-chairs Julie Cromer Young at firstname.lastname@example.org and Jim Faier at email@example.com by 1 November. The project team will then select a maximum of eight projects to be presented at the Symposium, ideally grouped into related topics or themes. Selections will be announced by 1 February 2015. For each selected project, a working draft of the paper (10-20 pages) must be submitted by 15 March 2015. There is no publication obligation.
According to information received from INTA:
"Participants will receive complimentary registration to the Academic Day program, including an all-professor panel exploring boundaries of trademark law, a trademark professor luncheon, a reception and other networking opportunities. Additional expenses are the speaker’s responsibility".
|Not all scholars are poor:|
this ancient Roman one had\
his own laptop, it seems ...
20 and 21 October, which means that there will be plenty to cover over a short time. You can check out the programme here. Alas, this Kat can't attend, but he hopes to get to hear all about it from any of his friends who do.
|Banksy: attacking immigrants -- or those|
who campaign to keep them out?
Trade mark squatters: now for an algorithm. "Trademark Squatters: Theory and Evidence from Chile" by Carsten Fink, Christian Helmers and Carlos Ponce, is an absorbing piece of research, published by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) on 26 September. It's pretty substantial, weighing in at 55 pages. You can read the fancy version here, and the plain version here. According to the abstract:
This is handy to know, but this Kat observes that the phenomenon of over-protection is quite common outside the world of IP. When he shelters under his umbrella, he notes that it stops the rain falling not only on him but on the ground immediately around him. He hopes this isn't excessive. Merpel agrees: trade mark registrations would not be so wide if registrants knew in advance (i) where their business would be heading during the currency of their initial registration and (ii) where and how the trade mark squatters would be seeking to do their dastardly deeds.
"This paper explores the phenomenon of “trademark squatting” – a situation in which someone other than the original brand owner obtains a trademark on a brand. We develop a model that shows how squatting results from market uncertainty that leads brand owners to rationally forgo registering trademarks, creating opportunities for squatting. We create an algorithm to identify squatters in the Chilean trademark register and show empirically that squatting is a persistent and systematic phenomenon. [Well, says Merpel, we all knew that anyway -- but here's the good bit:] Using data on trademark oppositions, we show that squatting leads brand owners that have been exposed to squatting to ‘over-protect’ their brands by registering disproportionately many trademarks and covering classes other than those directly related to their products and services. Trademark squatting, therefore, creates a strategic, albeit excessive, response by brand owners which inflates trademark filings".
It's easier to be over- or under-protected
than to get the scope of protection just right