Latest ETMR

Thanks to global warming the darling buds of May have been greatly in evidence this April. Legal publishers Sweet & Maxwell have also been experiencing an untimely rise of sap this spring, with the result that the May issue of the European Trade Mark Reports has also burst forth early in all its glory. Edited by two of the IPKat team, the ETMR contains some stunning decisions this month. They include, for the first time in English:
* Golden Rabbit, the decision of the Bundesgerichtshof in Germany that gives the sole right of abundant reproduction of chocolate Easter bunnies to Lindt on account of consumer perception of the rabbit's shape, fortunately registered as a trade mark;

* Vesta Forsikring AS v Trygg-Hansa AB, a Norwegian Supreme Court decision supplied by Felix Reimers (Grette, Oslo) on the extent to which the association of insurance companies in adjacent countries with lifebelts entitled them to register lifebelt devices as trade marks.
Other thoroughly enjoyable decisions in this issue include the ECJ rulings in Adam Opel and Dyson (see IPKat posts here and here). Don't forget, if you know of any interesting recent national or regional European trade mark cases that you think should be reproduced in the ETMR, just email the IPKat here and he'll see what he can do about it. Oh, and if you're attending this year's International Trademark Association (INTA) meeting in Chicago next week, be sure to visit the Thomson booth in the Exhibit Hall and pick up your free sample copy ...
Latest ETMR Latest ETMR Reviewed by Jeremy on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 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.