|
|
|
 Registration
Enforcement
Infringement
Ownership changes
Related rights
Internet issues
Other issues
Information
Contributors
About us
Contact details
Terms & conditions
Subscriptions
Free Trial
Subscribe
Other World Law Report sites:
World Media Law Report
World Trademark Review Yearbook 2008
© Copyright 2004-2008
Globe
Business Publishing Ltd
|
|
|
Fair use and sufficient care
Portrait rights in China are not absolute: fair use of a personality's image is allowed, as long as the person making the unauthorized use exercises care in the manner in which the portrait is displayed.
Full text |
|
 |
|
Speculations continue as ACTA meeting in Washington fails to reach agreement
The countries negotiating the Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement met at the end of July in Washington DC, but nothing tangible appears to have come out of the meeting. The fact that negotiators failed to agree on some basic aspects of border measures does not bode well for the negotiations of other chapters, which are arguably more controversial.
Full text |
|
 |
|
| |
(05/09/2008)
In Haribo Lakrids A/S v Hela Wine & Spirits, the Maritime and Commercial Court has held that the mark LOS PIRATAS, which was used by Hela Wine & Spirits to produce and sell spirits, was confusingly similar to Haribo's trademarks PIRATOS and SUPER PIRATOS. The court also concluded that the infringement was wilful and ordered Hela to pay compensation to Haribo.
Full text |
|
|
| |
(05/09/2008)
In Ashoka v OHIM, the CFI has dismissed an appeal against a decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM in which the latter had held that the mark DREAM IT, DO IT! was devoid of distinctive character. Among other things, the CFI agreed with the board that the mark would not be perceived as an indication of the commercial origin of the services in question.
Full text |
|
|
| |
(05/09/2008)
In Natural Answers Inc v SmithKline Beecham Corp, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has affirmed a grant of summary judgment in favour of SmithKline Beecham Corp, the maker of a smoking-cessation product sold under the mark COMMIT LOZENGES. Among other things, the court held that plaintiff Natural Answers Inc had abandoned its HERBAQUIT LOZENGES mark.
Full text |
|
|
| |
(04/09/2008)
In Apple Computer Inc v OHIM, the CFI has upheld a decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM in which the latter had held that there was likelihood of confusion between the device mark QUARTZ and the word mark QUARTZ, even though the goods covered by the marks were neither in competition with one another nor complementary.
Full text |
|
|
| |
(04/09/2008)
In Schering Corporation v Alkem Laboratories Limited, the Delhi High Court has held that there was no likelihood of confusion between the marks TEMOKEM on the one hand, and TEMODAL and TEMODAR on the other. Among other things, the court held that the common element between the marks (the prefix 'temo') derived from the generic word 'temozolomide' and thus fell within the public domain.
Full text |
|
|
| |
(04/09/2008)
In the latest instalment of a 16-year battle over the REDSKINS trademark, the US District Court for the District of Columbia has ruled that Pro-Football Inc was entitled to summary judgment because the last remaining defendant in the Washington Redskins trademark disparagement case was barred by laches from maintaining his claim.
Full text |
|
|
|
|
|
