Back in January 2007, MARQUES -- the Association of European Trade Mark Owners -- published on its website a Review of the First 150 Decisions on the Validity of Registered Community Designs. Today a revised second edition, Review of the First 300 Decisions on the Validity of Registered Community Designs, was launched on the MARQUES website.
Presenting the Review at the Winter Meeting of MARQUES in the strikingly beautiful Hesperia Tower Hotel, Barcelona this morning, David Stone (Howrey) explained the methodology of the Review and its significance, also highlighting some of the major problems faced in Community design practice in determining issues such as prior disclosure. For MARQUES members, the report is available on the MARQUES website: click Teams, then Designs Team, then Registered Community Designs. Anyone wishing to make enquiries concerning the Review is welcome to contact David direct.
Presenting the Review at the Winter Meeting of MARQUES in the strikingly beautiful Hesperia Tower Hotel, Barcelona this morning, David Stone (Howrey) explained the methodology of the Review and its significance, also highlighting some of the major problems faced in Community design practice in determining issues such as prior disclosure. For MARQUES members, the report is available on the MARQUES website: click Teams, then Designs Team, then Registered Community Designs. Anyone wishing to make enquiries concerning the Review is welcome to contact David direct.
First 300 RCD decisions now available
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Friday, February 22, 2008
Rating:
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