Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, designs, info-tech and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. Read, post comments and participate!

The team is Eleonora Rosati, Annsley Merelle Ward and Merpel. E-mail the Kats here!

The team is joined by GuestKats Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot, Jocelyn Bosse, Alessandro Cerri, Anastasiia Kyrylenko, Marcel Pemsel and Anna Maria Stein.

SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Antonios Baris (Book Review Editor), Rose Hughes (PatKat) and Chijioke Okorie (Africa Correspondent).

InternKats: Asude Sena Moya and Söğüt Atilla.
Home / bad faith / Passing off / trade mark / trade mark troll / Trade mark trolls reach the UK

Trade mark trolls reach the UK

- , , ,

The IPKat has been tipped off about this story from the BBC about a trade mark "troll" who has registered or applied to register trade marks which correspond with the names of existing Scottish businesses and have then offered to sell or "lease" them to the businesses in question for large sums of money. The person in question appears to be targeting the juice bar sector and has registered 40-odd juice-related names.

The IPKat notes that the existing businesses may be able to oppose or invalidate registrations based on marks protected by passing off, and perhaps to rely on bad faith grounds. However, the Kat has a niggling doubt - is it truly bad faith to register in a first to file system?
Trade mark trolls reach the UK Trade mark trolls reach the UK Reviewed by Anonymous on Wednesday, April 09, 2008 Rating: 5

8 comments:

  1. AnonymousWednesday, 9 April 2008 at 18:53:00 GMT+1

    Maybe the ECJ (C-529/07) will answer your question in a while ...

    http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en&newform=newform&alljur=alljur&jurcdj=jurcdj&jurtpi=jurtpi&jurtfp=jurtfp&alldocrec=alldocrec&docj=docj&docor=docor&docop=docop&docav=docav&docsom=docsom&docinf=docinf&alldocnorec=alldocnorec&docnoj=docnoj&docnoor=docnoor&typeord=ALLTYP&allcommjo=allcommjo&affint=affint&affclose=affclose&numaff=&ddatefs=&mdatefs=&ydatefs=&ddatefe=&mdatefe=&ydatefe=&nomusuel=&domaine=&mots=bad+faith+trade+mark&resmax=100&Submit=Submit

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousWednesday, 9 April 2008 at 19:22:00 GMT+1

    Is this the same Kat who wondered how on earth someone came close to registering the name of a political party and then seek to flog it back to the rightful owners (see Fine Gael case)?

    It may be 'first to file' regime, but you still have to sign a declaration of intention to use. Does 'use' include asking the 'rightful' owners for large amounts of money for something that they already have rights in ?

    I love the bit in the report that refers to "trade mark trolls, also known as patent trolls".Hmmm....

    ReplyDelete
  3. AndrewThursday, 10 April 2008 at 09:26:00 GMT+1

    Yes, this sounds like bad faith - see Moolicious Opposition decision: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tm/t-decisionmaking/t-challenge/t-challenge-decision-results/o33706.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousThursday, 10 April 2008 at 09:47:00 GMT+1

    I knew I'd get into trouble for that...Some of the Kat's brains belong to academics, and therefore the Kat reserves the right to be inconsistent - sorry - to objectively acknowledge both sides of the argument.

    In this case the moral side of the Kat is in no doubt that the "trolls'" behaviour takes advantage of others for no good reason except to make a fast buck, and therefore should be stopped. The argument for adopting the other approach which, to be fair, doesn't actually answer the moral argument, but instead rests on a different policy is does one automatically get a property right through use? One could link this into all the nice arguments about the limits of unfair competition - if there's no right there then is there unfairness for a person to take an opportunity at the expense of another?

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousThursday, 10 April 2008 at 10:52:00 GMT+1

    The German Federal Supreme Court has published a decision today that addresses this issue as well (http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&az=I%20ZR%2038/05). The court held that the "troll's" application amounts to unfair competition if he was aware of the foreign mark, and if it was more or less evident that the owner of this foreign mark would want to use the mark in the "troll's" country as well within a reasonable period of time.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousThursday, 10 April 2008 at 11:06:00 GMT+1

    It must be a terrible burden to have the brain of an academic.

    ReplyDelete
  7. AnonymousThursday, 10 April 2008 at 15:11:00 GMT+1

    It is - I should really give it back to the academic that I stole it from.

    ReplyDelete
  8. AnonymousFriday, 11 April 2008 at 17:40:00 GMT+1

    If he is not a competitor and instead he is just a tm troll its not likely that one could rely in unfair competition. Why not lack of legitimate interest? Dishosnest intent of use? All the moral issues would be safeguarded here.

    ReplyDelete

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

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )
Powered by Blogger.