Unlike the new Common Practice... |
3 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
If the UK ever tries to change practice, there might be some implications arising from the various options which there used to be on TM3 forms. For example, 10 years ago there was "If you have shown the mark in black and white we will not consider these colours are a feature of the mark unless you tell us something different here". "If you have shown the mark in colour we will assume you want the mark registered in these colours unless you tell us something different here". Older forms had still further boxes etc. if I recall.
ReplyDeleteWasting your time with the culture club connection in here methinks.
ReplyDeleteThe UK IPO is already refusing to accept colour variations as series marks. I had one set rejected initially in February and the rejection has been uphald by the hearing officer.
ReplyDelete