Colombia. Judge Sandoval, here, from the Department of Jurisdictional Matters has clarified the position of the Colombian Superintendency
of Industry and Commerce on infringement of trademarks as well as on the proper interpretation of Article 243 from Decision 486/2000. With a strong didactic focus, the decision elaborates on the types of injury and the manner of quantifying damages under the IP laws of Colombia.Mexico. Tequila was the first (and probably best known) registered Mexican denomination of origin (1974). On January 18, 2019, Mr. Juan Lozano Tovar, IMPI’s Director General, acknowledged Tequila as the most important Mexican DO while meeting with executives of the Tequila Regulatory Council to emphasize the importance of Mexican GIs.
Mr. Lozano also announced that IMPI will publish the application of the raicilla denomination of origin for raicilla, meaning that there will a new Mexican liquor boarding the Mexican DO train. The application, which dates back to 2014, will look to protect this spirit, which like tequila and mezcal, is a product of the agave plant.
Perú. It is rare indeed when two Latin American countries fight over a DO in Asia. This time, it is India’s Intellectual Property Appellate Board that has determined that Perú, and not Chile, owns the exclusive rights within India for Pisco. After a nine-year dispute, the Board made its decision, considering various historical and geographical factors (such as that the name Pisco is used to identify a valley, a river and a coastal city in Perú; and that the word means “bird” in quechua, being an aboriginal Peruvian language).
Following this decision in India, the scoreboard is as follows: Perú has prevailed in Nicaragua, Panamá, Venezuela, Cuba and now India, while Chile has prevailed in Japan, New Zealand and Mexico. In the US, Canada, China and the EU, both countries have been recognized as owners.
Picture by Heraldy and is used pursuant to the GNU Free Documentation License and Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
Hola, I will have the IP--and a shot of Tequila
Reviewed by Neil Wilkof
on
Monday, February 04, 2019
Rating:
Reviewed by Neil Wilkof
on
Monday, February 04, 2019
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] Thou shalt not discriminate the Lego block over any other kind of product – GRUR speaks out on C-211/24](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWJYQUJNvYydrZcjwSHPuxd14xX3_48aBusHKBogY-Wg1BPSJSABbFFjmGiUV3aqG2npP9xYaIl1vtWK5AsqGOQPgRD2TWFLhyyc4xGm1fHDD-tt9kHcrSSgAyju2P9wSKz0VW6h7D5MD4Hxd9vREyxKYzlMRNXxxtxc3DiNsXppfVaxgSxAMV/s72-c/21742619125_7c9e53cd39_o.png)
![[Guest post] Comparison of wine and gin: the EUIPO’s unquestionable Similarity Tool](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNfTEBXiPVS0XjZi4mNE1OtXLxXiEp1PUgcUK7MMMXlfyTkO5SMXv-VCMXXNdS_F1XdMMxYca1VbBTGvvDeTVpo5x-5YwR7atQJmK3x32T8LACpf4308kht3nEtaxPwEPcGGrB0s5xjGktmQPOiVwPVLRO5JbW19qupc7xUtiVutvaWHow0OpBkA/s72-c/Picture%201.jpg)
![[Guest post] Muddying the waters of copyright – a rapid reaction to today’s IPEC decision which sees the sinking of the WaterRower’s claims for copyright protection](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7chFANC7ppmZl4_nlR6_hZEcg6cOhVEJNVXqki4p82BoVlcLFotuOXzHWYD5lKLiiK_kRoWeXmJjjaV2DpoKsAWq8U3LFioO5W_841a9gcfDIFjvZWcGqfnr0jWJNtyXptIYR_8bxCssaDkJ9KMokuSqy1g65Il7p2hPwo4MfRCEGoUPQJesvbg/s72-w400-c-h189/Screenshot%202024-11-11%20at%2018.20.45.png)
Posts
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