According to the minutes of the meeting of the Registration Practice Working Group of the Trade Mark Registry, during the last financial year, domestic demand for trade marks was 3% below the previous financial year and Madrid ( International ) filings increased by 2%.
However, during April and May of this year, domestic filings were equal to the same period last year whilst Madrid filings have fallen by 16%. However, in Sweden there was a 20% increase in domestic filings in 2004 ( Madrid slightly down ), while Denmark is forecasting a 13% increase in domestic filings in 2004 and Germany there has been an 8% increase in domestic filings. OHIM meanwhile is reporting an increase in filings ( 14000 applications in the first quarter of 2004 ). According to the minutes, none of the offices can offer a reason for this upsurge. Can any of the IPKat’s readers offer an explanation?
Other things increasing in Scandinavia here, here and here
However, during April and May of this year, domestic filings were equal to the same period last year whilst Madrid filings have fallen by 16%. However, in Sweden there was a 20% increase in domestic filings in 2004 ( Madrid slightly down ), while Denmark is forecasting a 13% increase in domestic filings in 2004 and Germany there has been an 8% increase in domestic filings. OHIM meanwhile is reporting an increase in filings ( 14000 applications in the first quarter of 2004 ). According to the minutes, none of the offices can offer a reason for this upsurge. Can any of the IPKat’s readers offer an explanation?
Other things increasing in Scandinavia here, here and here
IPKAT RIDDLE: TRADE MARK SMORGASBORD
![IPKAT RIDDLE: TRADE MARK SMORGASBORD]()
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Tuesday, July 06, 2004
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
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: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html