Thanks again to the UK's Intellectual Property Office (IPO), the IPKat has learned of yet another trade mark question which is to be referred to the Court of Justice so that a preliminary ruling can be made on a question of law. According to the information provided by the IPO, it's the dog-related Case C-561/11 Fédération Cynologique Internationale v Federación Canina Internacional de Perros de Pura Raza and the referring court is the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Alicante (sitting as Community Trade Mark Court No 1). The question runs like this:
The IPKat's friends at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) are chortling with glee at the good news that IP filings worldwide rebounded strongly in 2010, after a considerable decline in 2009. According to WIPO, patent filings rose by 7.2%, following a 3.6% decline in 2009, while trade mark filings rose by 11.8%, having fallen by 2.6% in 2009. China and the US accounted for the greatest share of the increased filings. The 11.8% increase in trade mark applications was the largest growth since 2000. Industrial designs applications rose by 13%, having declined over the previous two years -- also mainly on account of high growth in China, which accounted for 83% of total growth. Europe is starting to look like a non-starter ...
Around the weblogs. Afro-IP's Kingsley Egbuonu's A to Z tour of official IP sites in Africa takes him to one of the focal points of 2011's Arab Spring -- Libya. Bulgaria celebrates its first Protected Geographical Indication, this being a sausage of massive historical and cultural significance: you can read about the ethnography of this sausage on Class 46 here. The jiplp weblog reproduces the January editorial of the Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, on open innovation, and also features a special offer by OUP of 20% off the price of the 2nd edition of Olivier Vrins and Marius Schneider's excellent book on Border Measures. If patents in Portugal and the resolution of medical IP disputes is more to your fancy, then take a look at Pedro Malaquias's piece for PatLit on a particularly unusual bit of legislative reform, here.
"In proceedings for infringement of the exclusive right conferred by a Community trade mark, does the right to prevent the use thereof by third parties in the course of trade provided for in Article 9(1) of Council Regulation ... 207/2009 ... on the Community trade mark extend to any third party who uses a sign that involves a likelihood of confusion (because it is similar to the Community trade mark and the services or goods are similar) or, on the contrary, is the third party who uses that sign (capable of being confused) which has been registered in his name as a Community trade mark excluded until such time as that subsequent trade mark registration has been declared invalid?"If you want to tell the UK government what you think the answer is, and whether it should be thinking of making any representations to the Court of Justice, you have to email policy@ipo.gsi.gov.uk before this Thursday, 29 December 2011.
A new logo for WIPO, to match its sunny mood? |
Around the weblogs. Afro-IP's Kingsley Egbuonu's A to Z tour of official IP sites in Africa takes him to one of the focal points of 2011's Arab Spring -- Libya. Bulgaria celebrates its first Protected Geographical Indication, this being a sausage of massive historical and cultural significance: you can read about the ethnography of this sausage on Class 46 here. The jiplp weblog reproduces the January editorial of the Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, on open innovation, and also features a special offer by OUP of 20% off the price of the 2nd edition of Olivier Vrins and Marius Schneider's excellent book on Border Measures. If patents in Portugal and the resolution of medical IP disputes is more to your fancy, then take a look at Pedro Malaquias's piece for PatLit on a particularly unusual bit of legislative reform, here.
Monday miscellany
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Monday, December 26, 2011
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