tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post6087526736465954419..comments2024-03-28T13:45:42.289+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Trade Marks and Brands: Cohabitation or Rustication?Verónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-60679671070700635162012-04-24T16:25:31.838+01:002012-04-24T16:25:31.838+01:00I so appreciate this blog. I have always had the ...I so appreciate this blog. I have always had the sense that the term "brand" is thrown about somewhat carelessly, and you have finally set out why this is problematic in a way that I can now evangelize. Thank you!Tara Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17691748438376846482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-54054350333981951262012-04-24T14:30:24.881+01:002012-04-24T14:30:24.881+01:00It may be oversimplified, but surely patent is to ...It may be oversimplified, but surely patent is to invention as trade mark is to brand. <br /><br />No?Chrisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-50136801347993019402012-04-24T13:46:43.787+01:002012-04-24T13:46:43.787+01:00In Landes-Posner, The Economic Structure of Intell...In Landes-Posner, The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law, 2003, p. 167, they found trademarks and brand name to be “rough synonyms”. In Beebe, Cotter, Lemely, Menell and Merges, Trademarks, Unfair Competition and Business Torts, 2011, they don´t use “brands” as a word of art. And 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'<br /><br />Mats Björkenfeldt, StockholmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-71601649558750511032012-04-24T12:37:33.868+01:002012-04-24T12:37:33.868+01:00It's pretty easy, though.
Brands identify an...It's pretty easy, though. <br /><br />Brands identify an offer in the market, and have value as such. <br /><br />Trademarks are legal tools that allow to enforce a brands exclusive use in a particular market (geographical/classification).<br /><br />Most of the value is with the brand, and a trademark can add additional value because of increased enforceability (blocking others' access to use of the brand). <br /><br />The court seems sloppy in its use of words - hardly a surprise, but not necessarily that relevant.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-84291899800138661002012-04-24T12:02:59.068+01:002012-04-24T12:02:59.068+01:00Am not sure if my earlier comment worked so..
In w...Am not sure if my earlier comment worked so..<br />In writing my book, Legally Branded, (out soon), which is aimed at SMEs rather than lawyers, I've reached the conclusion that we need a new discipline of Brand Law. Trade marks are a central component of a brand lawyer's skills, but there are so many other laws that are relevant to a brand. By equating trade marks with brands, the legal profession does not give sufficiently comprehensive advice to clients, so it is an important question you raise, and one that INTA and lawyers would do well to consider. It has practical significance and isn't just academic.Shireen Smith, Azrightshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00878214320196044240noreply@blogger.com