On Tuesday the IPKat wrote about the latest round of Budweiser litigation. Dev Gangjee of OXIPRC has written to him with some further background.
Budejovicky Budvar (BB) and Anheuser-Busch (AB) have been battling for the rights to the Budweiser trademarks worldwide for more than 100 years and have about 40 lawsuits pending. (40 – 60 lawsuits worldwide) A good place to find reporting is the archives of the following - Search http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ for keywords "Budejovicky Budvar" An incomplete list of various lawsuits and administrative procedures in courts and trade mark registries around the world -
Argentina; Australia; Brazil; Belgium; Cambodia; Denmark; Finland; France; Hong Kong; Hungary; Italy; Ireland; Japan; Korea; Lithuania; Netherlands; New Zealand; Portugal; Russia; Serbia and Montenegro; South Korea; Spain; Switzerland; Tajikistan; United Kingdom.
The rash of litigation has also often been commented on by the courts.
The IPKat says, thanks Dev.
Budejovicky Budvar (BB) and Anheuser-Busch (AB) have been battling for the rights to the Budweiser trademarks worldwide for more than 100 years and have about 40 lawsuits pending. (40 – 60 lawsuits worldwide) A good place to find reporting is the archives of the following - Search http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ for keywords "Budejovicky Budvar" An incomplete list of various lawsuits and administrative procedures in courts and trade mark registries around the world -
Argentina; Australia; Brazil; Belgium; Cambodia; Denmark; Finland; France; Hong Kong; Hungary; Italy; Ireland; Japan; Korea; Lithuania; Netherlands; New Zealand; Portugal; Russia; Serbia and Montenegro; South Korea; Spain; Switzerland; Tajikistan; United Kingdom.
The rash of litigation has also often been commented on by the courts.
The IPKat says, thanks Dev.
Do you want to reuse the IPKat content? Please refer to our
Policies section.
If you have any queries or requests for permission, please get in touch with the IPKat team.
Comments
Post a Comment
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