Not all pirates are infringers ...

Can it really be true that national IP offices have voted to rob both the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market -- which runs the Community trade mark system -- and CTM users? News has reached the IPKat of a strange decision, apparently taken by the Budget Committee of OHIM in Alicante on 7 November. The Budget Committee has the power to set the fees paid to national offices for the search reports produced when you apply for a CTM. Readers may remember that the Commission wanted to abolish these reports on the ground that only a few people seemed to think they were of any value -- but national offices opposed this since it would mean losing a handy source of income. The compromise was to make the search reports optional, and the switch to the new system happens on 10 March next year.

Well ... it seems that the Budget Committee has decided to increase the fee which the Office pays to each national office from the present €12 per report per office to a fee of €16. The strange thing is that OHIM itself can at present only charge applicants €12 under the current fee regulation. This means that the difference will have to be made up by OHIM, which gets its income from fees paid by those who do not want these new optional searches.

But that's not all. In another development, it appears that the number of national offices carrying out these searches will stay at 17, as at present. But in future there will not be any searches from the Benelux Office, which has announced that it will withdraw. This apparent reduction in coverage will however be compensated by the future inclusion of ... Malta.

Asks the IPKat, are we to hear any more about this intriguing subject? Can these scurrilous rumours be denied? We Kats know that a lot of influential people read this weblog and we hope that, if the news is correct, they will stand up and do something about it.

Merpel adds, aren't most of the Members of the Budget Committee - who voted on this matter - from the national offices? To whom are they answerable for their decisions?
Not all pirates are infringers ... Not all pirates are infringers ... Reviewed by Jeremy on Thursday, November 08, 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.