Friday fantasies

It was with pleasure that this Kat learned that the mysterious and magical Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys (ITMA) has announced that Chris McLeod is succeeding Catherine Wolfe as President of the Institute, for a two-year term.  This is good news, since it involves the succession of Katfriends.  What ITMA Presidents actually do is a matter of speculation, but what they're supposed to do is to look pretty,do lots of delegating and take full blame responsibility for the policy and direction of the Institute and for maintaining contact with UK legislators and international organisations [Merpel still wants to know why ITMA never got a Charter, like the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA), and why indeed ITMA never merged with CIPA either. Was it the tasty prospect of two Christmas dinners rather than one, or was there some rather more subtle force at work?  Do tell!]

Holding a hedgehog: it's
not as prickly as handling
the Madrid Protocol ...
Coexistence Agreements.  If you are heading out to the International Trademark Association Meeting in Hong Kong next week, and have nothing better to do, why not join this Kat while he is conducting his Table Topic on Negotiating Coexistence Agreements (that's coded TW15) on Wednesday morning from 8 am to 10 am?  Numbers are limited but, if you miss this topic, there are loads of other trade mark enthusiasts with whom you can have breakfast and a reasonable chat (click here for the full list). From registering slogans to best practices in the social media, how to handle the Madrid Protocol to how to crochet your very own logo, there's something for everyone. And while you're in Hong Kong, don't forget to come and say hello.  Three Kats will be in evidence (Jeremy, Birgit and Neil) and you might just be able to catch one or two of them at this year's Meet the Bloggers session, kindly and altruistically hosted by Marks & Clerk at the Royal Hong Kong Yacht Club (for details just click here).

Around the weblogs.  This Kat, writing on SOLO IP, has a little rant at the expense of those expensive directories of professional experts to which IP practitioners are encouraged, if not expected, to contribute.  Class 46 reports on a dispute between a law firm and two former members as to the ownership of copyright in what became the firm's logo, a dispute which has spilled over from Mexico to Spain. The same blog also gives an account of an ingenious scam, all the way from Hungary, in which dealers in fake products concealed them within their own branding when moving them from place to place.

Trade mark podcast -- now in black and white.  Katfriend Rolf Claessen has excitedly emailed us today with the hot-off-the-press (actually, not-off-the-press) news that he has just released the first episode in his series of IP Fridays podcasts, here.  He adds: "You might want to listen in in the podcast where we talk about the figurative black & white trade marks. This is simply outrageous by OHIM and the other offices [the "this" to which Rolf refers is actually this]. Something they simply did not think through". Could be ...
Friday fantasies Friday fantasies Reviewed by Jeremy on Friday, May 02, 2014 Rating: 5


  1. Dear Jeremy, thank you so much for the mention! Rolf

  2. ITMA is too small. The Privy Council has a policy of restricting charters to bodies with 5000+ members.

  3. More here from the IPKat on the black and white/colour marks front, for those who missed it:

  4. I tried to post a comment to the Marques post, but it didn't seem to work, so I'll try here instead...

    The story highlights the confusion as to whether counterfeiting and trade mark infringement are the same or not. Presumably it is in general entirely legal to make your own products and put your own trade mark on them?


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.