IPKAT UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE DAY: MOULTING OR MALTING?

The IPKat presents a new occasional series of IP titbits that really don't make the case strongly enough. Today's comes from the 2003 OHIM decision in Chivas Bros Ltd v A/S Arovit Petfood (para.60):
The qualities associated with Scotch whisky, assiduously nurtured by the opponent, are simply not translatable to bulk food for farm animals, or to food for domestic animals.


IPKAT UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE DAY: MOULTING OR MALTING? IPKAT UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE DAY: MOULTING OR MALTING? Reviewed by Unknown on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 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: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.