IP student materials: what to think about when thinking about a trade mark opposition?

What should one think about when tasked with drafting a trade mark opposition or defending a trade mark application? This is a question that junior lawyers and trainee trade mark attorneys quickly (and regularly) encounter in their professional roles, and can address also thanks to templates and/or guidance from senior colleagues. But what about IP students, both at the undergraduate and postgraduate (eg, LLM) level?

As a student, one is tasked with reading decisions of trade mark offices and courts, but it might be quite challenging to think about what comes before those decisions. What happens after a trade mark applicant has managed to get to the point that their trade mark application is published by the competent Office (whether EUIPO or national trade mark office) and, before there is even time to sigh in relief, someone files a trade mark opposition against their application?

As part of my IP student materials previously published on The IPKat, I have now prepared some guidance for my students regarding trade mark oppositions. Hoping that students at different institutions might find it useful, the guidance, which comes with a CC BY-NC licence, can be accessed here. Some of the text is also reproduced below:

Other IP study materials include:

Trade Marks
Student essays/theses
IP student materials: what to think about when thinking about a trade mark opposition? IP student materials: what to think about when thinking about a trade mark opposition? Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati on Monday, October 05, 2020 Rating: 5

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

Powered by Blogger.