The UK Trade Marks Registry has announced that it is going to apply the Libertel criteria for the graphic representation of colour trade marks to applications to register colour as applied to defined surface areas. This practice amendment comes even though the comments in Libertel were limited to applications to register colours in the abstract. As of yesterday, marks consisting of colour alone

♦ may not just be provided as colour samples on paper;
♦ may be presented as a written description of the colour together with the relevant code from an internationally recognised colour identification system;
♦ may be presented by other means that meet the Sieckmann criteria of being clear, precise, self-contained, easily accessible, intelligible, durable and objective.

Colours can be submitted by e-filing or by fax, although in the latter case a description in words will be necessary and it is safe to also refer to an internationally recognised colour code.

The IPKat welcomes this advisory notice but wonders why the Registry has confined its guidance only to colours as applied to a defined surface area. If an application to register a colour which lacks such a defined area is refused on the basis that it falls outside the scope of this notice, applicants should remember that Trade Marks Registry advisory notices are not the same as statute law: they are there to ensure consistent treatment of applications by different examiners and to let applicants know how to process their applications, not to define the absolute grounds upon which an application is refused.

Learn about colours here and choose your Pantone shades here
Songs about colours here, here and here
Sing a rainbow here

UK OFFICIAL GUIDANCE ON COLOUR MARKS UK OFFICIAL GUIDANCE ON COLOUR MARKS Reviewed by Jeremy and Ilanah on Friday, October 24, 2003 Rating: 5

No comments:

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:

Powered by Blogger.