Australia kicks Singapore into life

The IPKat has excitedly read WIPO Press Release PR/2008/581, which brings the joyous news that the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks will enter into force next year. According to the text,
"A new international treaty setting standards for trademark registration procedures will become effective in 2009 following its ratification by Australia on December 16, 2008. This is the tenth ratification of the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks (“the Singapore Treaty”) and will allow the treaty to enter into force on March 16. 2009.
WIPO Director General, Francis Gurry, welcomed this development saying that the entry into force of the Singapore Treaty ... opened the way for the branded goods industry to register and manage trademark rights cost-effectively and efficiently. This, he said, was a particularly welcome development for companies seeking to generate cost savings, and maintain their market position in the current turbulent economic circumstances [a nicely topical touch -- WIPO would have had to come up with quite a different line if we were all experiencing an economic boom].

... The Treaty standardizes procedural aspects of trademark registration and licensing and enables owners of trademarks and national trademark authorities to take advantage of efficiencies in using modern communications technologies to process and manage evolving trademark rights. By establishing common standards for procedural aspects of trademark registration and licensing, the Treaty helps to create a level playing field for all economic operators that invest in branded goods. It recognizes developments in the branded goods industry [the IPKat wonders which Articles of the Treaty achieve this dramatic end ...] and marks a new approach to securing investment in product differentiation [... and this too]. A great deal of creativity and investment goes into the development of brands and it is vital for the industry to be able to secure that investment. The Singapore Treaty establishes trademark office administration rules applicable to all types of trademarks, taking into account the advantages and potential of electronic communication facilities, while recognizing the varying needs of both developing and developed nations. ...".
The IPKat, like most felines, spends 18 hours a day fast asleep and therefore appreciates anything that will give him a quiet life.  The Singapore Treaty at least makes this desirable end a little more achievable. Well done everyone.   Merpel says, alas there is still too much bureaucratic inconvenience to be overcome.  Applying to register a trade mark online should be as easy as buying a book on Amazon -- but we're still some way short of this.

Singapore Cat Club here
Australia kicks Singapore into life Australia kicks Singapore into life Reviewed by Jeremy on Thursday, December 18, 2008 Rating: 5


  1. According to WIPO PR/2008/568 ( the USA is the eighth country -party to the Treaty. Singapore, Switzerland, Romania, Denmark, Latvia and Kyrgyzstan are the other seven. Australia has become the tenth. Does anybody know who is the ninth?

  2. That's a real mystery (anyway, you listed 6 countries instead of 7.. the mystery get more thick ;-)
    Even counting Bulgaria, that made an accession and not a ratification, the total countries are still 9 and not 10, as requested by the treaty for the entry into force. Any suggestion? Maybe WIPO site is not so up-to-date..

  3. Yes, my appologies to Bulgaria. But I still think the IB has mistaken. The list of all ratifications is at . I believe Notification No 2 misled the IB.


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.