tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84341340754397419292024-03-13T00:45:24.439+00:00NIPC BrandingTrade Marks and Branding for Startups and Other Small BusinessesJane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-35117539166455295082024-03-13T00:37:00.004+00:002024-03-13T00:44:52.484+00:00Beverly Hills Polo Club Litigation<p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhspzYS-ceXXtCea5kjDMnRs33Z5UF7cp_UswXhBvZdBm7MXlRo1Lvdis2iv3YIRm5BjNRCOa-HQo0yUHcDtHUf7kU5wSyIZ-9irn8KMYwbuu36ZpiYZN2um3TyelU3Hf00gP21Vs6KNC1rJd0HhVErCx0vBOJHetJnDR-wne3Cgn9XT6tEmyGOPlbUz6M/s2128/Campeonato_Argentino_de_Polo_2010_-_5237109478_e7ed034169_o.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1197" data-original-width="2128" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhspzYS-ceXXtCea5kjDMnRs33Z5UF7cp_UswXhBvZdBm7MXlRo1Lvdis2iv3YIRm5BjNRCOa-HQo0yUHcDtHUf7kU5wSyIZ-9irn8KMYwbuu36ZpiYZN2um3TyelU3Hf00gP21Vs6KNC1rJd0HhVErCx0vBOJHetJnDR-wne3Cgn9XT6tEmyGOPlbUz6M/w400-h225/Campeonato_Argentino_de_Polo_2010_-_5237109478_e7ed034169_o.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Author </b>Roger Schultz <b>Licence </b><a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en" target="_blank">CC BY-SA2.0 Deed</a> <b>Source </b><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campeonato_Argentino_de_Polo_2010_-_5237109478_e7ed034169_o.jpg" target="_blank">Wikimedia Commons</a></span></td></tr></tbody></table><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Campeonato_Argentino_de_Polo_2010_-_5237109478_e7ed034169_o.jpg" target="_blank"><br /></a></span> <p></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span></p><p>Sometimes the same brand is owned by different businesses in different countries. That did not matter much in the days before the Internet because the only consumers who were likely to come across the same brand in different hands would have been travellers, Nobody minded if a tourist purchased goods marketed under a familiar label that were cheaper, better or simply not available at home while on holiday and brought them home. The only time there might have been a problem would have been if a trader imported large quantities of branded goods from overseas and attempted to resell them here. He or she would have risked an action for trade mark infringement from the owner of the brand in the United Kingdom. </p><p>All that changed with the Internet because it created a worldwide marketplace for goods and services. Trade marks protect brands within the country or territory for which they are registered. They cannot prevent the use of the registered mark beyond that country or territory's shores. There is in theory nothing to stop a consumer in the United Kingdom from selecting branded goods from a foreign website, paying and taking delivery of them abroad and arranging for a carrier to transport them home. The consumer is not infringing any trade marks because he is not using the marks in the course of trade, Nor is the retailer because the sale takes place abroad. Yet such transactions would render trade marks useless in electronic commerce if they were allowed to continue.</p><p>The Court of Justice of the European Union has developed two doctrines to regulate such transactions:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>One is to treat targeting of consumers in a particular market as an infringement of the trademarks that have been registered in that market; and </li><li>The other is to the rule in <i>Blomqvist's case </i>(<a href="https://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2014/C9813.html" target="_blank">Case C-98/13 <i>Martin Blomqvist v Rolex SA</i></a> [2014] EUECJ C-98/13, [2014] Bus LR 356, [2014] WLR(D) 47, ECLI:EU: C:2014:55, [2014] ECDR 10, [2014] ETMR 25, EU: C:2014:55) in which the Court held that the mere entry of a counterfeit watch into Danish territory entitled customs officers and the IP owner to impound it,</li></ul>The concept of targeting is better developed than the rule in <i>Blomqvist's case </i>but the UK Supreme Court has referred to only a handful of European and English cases in support of that doctrine.<br /><br />The issue arose in <i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2021/118.html" target="_blank">Lifestyle Equities CV and another v Amazon UK Services Ltd and others</a></i> [2021] FSR 19, [2021] EWHC 118 (Ch). The word mark BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB and the equestrian logo shown below are held by different entities in Europe and the United States:<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNaux61gEYmJ4Q2ejXvWXn8jXe-LNUju7eXIyjlwk7deB_t_nQDt3N4YXcJYXLe4H7wGuQ4FWQA0jB46_sMaHUKQeaUk6eqBHr6uyYtgpwD4SakdBcbWaBFLmUGy2aAmuuVSs_6jHKodGYUbG6Eqhz5nOLYA9P9yhZwYALtxJdgnl-6b-cPcbObRK-Pmc/s152/118.image001.gif" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="118" data-original-width="152" height="311" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNaux61gEYmJ4Q2ejXvWXn8jXe-LNUju7eXIyjlwk7deB_t_nQDt3N4YXcJYXLe4H7wGuQ4FWQA0jB46_sMaHUKQeaUk6eqBHr6uyYtgpwD4SakdBcbWaBFLmUGy2aAmuuVSs_6jHKodGYUbG6Eqhz5nOLYA9P9yhZwYALtxJdgnl-6b-cPcbObRK-Pmc/w400-h311/118.image001.gif" width="400" /></a></div><br /><p>Clothing and luxury goods intended for the American market are marketed on Amazon's US website. From time to time consumers in the UK have purchased trade marked items from that site and arranged for them to be transported to their homes. </p><p>Lifestyle Equities CV and Lifestyle Licensing BV ("Lifestyle") sued Amazon.com Inc. for trade mark infringement alleging that Amazon's US site had targeted British consumers. The action was tried by Mr Justice Michael Green who dismissed the claim for the following reasons:</p><blockquote>"(i) the USA website advised incoming consumers from the UK about the availability of the UK website, (ii) that this would for UK consumers produce lower delivery times and prices than the USA website, (iii) that there were statistically very few sales of the US branded goods to the UK, and (iv) that Lifestyle's purpose in bringing the claim was not so much to prevent sales to the UK but to prevent UK consumers who strayed onto the USA website learning of the low prices of the US branded goods, thereby downgrading the value of the marks."</blockquote>He also distinguished <i>Blomqvist</i> on the basis that the sale had been made in Denmark or the watch was intended for onward sale.<div><br /></div><div>Lifestyle appealed to the Court of Appeal which found that Mr Justice Michael Green had erred in several respects. It carried out its own assessment of the facts and found that Amazon had targeted British consumers and had therefore infringed art 9 of the EU Trade Mark Regulation and s,.10 (1) of the Trade Marks Act 1994, It granted an injunction and an inquiry as to damages to Lifestyle (see <a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2022/552.html" target="_blank"><i>Lifestyle Equities CV and another v Amazon UK Services Ltd and others</i></a> [2023] 1 All ER 905, [2022] EWCA Civ 552, [2023] Bus LR 1010, [2022] WLR(D) 199, [2023] 1 All ER (Comm) 189, [2022] FSR 20).</div><div><br /></div><div>Amazon appealed to the Supreme Court which handed down judgment on 6 March 2024 (<i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2024/8.html" target="_blank">Lifestyle Equities CV and another v Amazon UK Services Ltd and others</a> </i>[2024] UKSC 8). The Supreme Court carried out its own multifactorial assessment which led it to conclude that there had been targeting of British consumers and consequential trade mark infringement. The Court of Appeal had erred as had Mr Justice Michael Green but as the Court of Appeal had reached the right decision the Supreme Court did not disturb its injunction or order for an inquiry as to damages. Having found that Amazon had infringed Lifestyle's trade marks by targeting consumers it was unnecessary for the Supreme Court to make a finding on the rule in <i>Blonqvist's case </i>and the justices declined to do so.<br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Because of the numbers who use Amazon this judgment could have important and far-reaching consequences. For those who want to learn more about this case, I have written a more detailed article in <i>NIPC Law</i> entitled <i><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/2024/03/lifestyle-equities-v-amazon.html" target="_blank">Trade Marks: Lifestyle Equities v Amazon</a>. </i>That article links to the judgments of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and Mr Justice Michael Green and other materials on the Supreme Court's website. I am also willing to discuss this case with anyone who calls me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 during normal business hours or sends me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact page</a>,</div>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-1352737842185410532022-11-05T06:07:00.004+00:002022-11-05T06:09:43.365+00:00UDRP: Responding to a Complaint <p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7kAHsME7l7NMZbRQdM9tLOU6JWcBlZHBVXUhUs3D4XoEeRTYcEk2GeCuVKuVSY2H1su2dvc3p_8wbCA0p77DeI-Wlt2DbPiCwEU-U7zFQ0tATz3MKi_A-_5BS2aQwTIGXClbackZd_NrzEiI_YlEC3QQ6-c7iBdKoWtN7-uUQ0WY2KQmZ-V9wDJx8/s549/Othello_and_Iago.gif" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="393" data-original-width="549" height="286" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7kAHsME7l7NMZbRQdM9tLOU6JWcBlZHBVXUhUs3D4XoEeRTYcEk2GeCuVKuVSY2H1su2dvc3p_8wbCA0p77DeI-Wlt2DbPiCwEU-U7zFQ0tATz3MKi_A-_5BS2aQwTIGXClbackZd_NrzEiI_YlEC3QQ6-c7iBdKoWtN7-uUQ0WY2KQmZ-V9wDJx8/w400-h286/Othello_and_Iago.gif" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Author </b><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Othello_and_Iago.gif" target="_blank">CyberGhostface</a> <b>Licence </b>O<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Othello_and_Iago.gif" target="_blank">ut of copyright</a> <b>Source </b><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Othello_and_Iago.gif" target="_blank">Wikimedia Commons</a></span></td></tr></tbody></table><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><br /> </span><p></p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">J</a></span><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" style="font-size: small;" target="_blank">ane Lambert</a></div><div><br /></div><div>Over the last few days, I have been writing about the <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012-02-25-en" target="_blank">Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("UDRP")</a>, The UDRP is an <a href="https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/glossary" target="_blank">alternative dispute resolution</a> procedure for resolving disputes between brand owners and domain name holders over the right to register a domain name, As I said in <i><a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/2022/10/the-terms-that-are-incorporated-into.html" target="_blank">The Terms that are incorporated into every Agreement to register a Domain Name</a> </i>on 30 Oct 2022, it works because an agreement to refer such disputes to the UDRP is incorporated into every agreement for the registration of a generic top-level domain name.</div><div><br /></div><div>On 2 Nov 2022, I discussed how a brand owner can claim the transfer or cancellation of the registration of a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to its trade mark or trade name in <i><a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/2022/11/complaints-under-udrp.html" target="_blank">Complaints under the UDRP</a>. </i>In the last paragraph of that article, I promised to discuss how a domain name holder should respond to such a <i>complaint </i>in my next post. As it happens, I discussed that topic in <i><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/2015/11/defending-your-domain-name-in-udrp.html" target="_blank">Defending your Domain Name in the UDRP</a></i> which appeared in <i>NIPC Law </i>on 28 Nov 2015.</div><div><br /></div><div>Even though that article is nearly 7 years old it is still relevant. It requires updating in only two respects. The first is that <i><a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview2.0/index.html" target="_blank">WIPO Overview 2.0</a> </i>which I mentioned in the "Essential Reading" paragraph has now been superseded by <i><a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/" target="_blank">WIPO Overview 3.0</a>. </i>The second is that it is very difficult to challenge the decision of a UDRP panellist in the English courts (see <i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2015/3509.html" target="_blank">Yoyo.email Ltd v Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc and other</a></i>s [2015] EWHC 3509 (Ch) (2 Dec 2015) and <span style="font-size: 13.3333px;"> </span><i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/IPEC/2016/1379.html" target="_blank">Ross v Playboy Enterprises International, Inc</a></i> [2016] EWHC 1379 (IPEC) (13 June 2016)).</div><div><br /></div><div>Anyone wishing to discuss this article may call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my<a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank"> contact page</a>.</div>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-63656617442003060362022-11-02T14:33:00.010+00:002022-11-03T09:12:07.133+00:00Complaints under the UDRP<p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5lJOW4MwYuyFrk48ygU7QBkrkOF7fJ0ov55zOt0Rnm_UO0n8Qt7kM0S_5tZDgG09fiige0qga1gvko5CmEtjJXZiRYjR7KnvEglDMfKV72RXRbcWc0A2xPtowSOIljz7sqPh-EeXOceZKeGGbUuLUjKIFYKNlv0HcJgItWD7WZVaG0-rXj8KUdbeC/s829/Areas_of_WIPO_Domain_Name_Complainant_Activity_2021.png" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="736" data-original-width="829" height="355" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5lJOW4MwYuyFrk48ygU7QBkrkOF7fJ0ov55zOt0Rnm_UO0n8Qt7kM0S_5tZDgG09fiige0qga1gvko5CmEtjJXZiRYjR7KnvEglDMfKV72RXRbcWc0A2xPtowSOIljz7sqPh-EeXOceZKeGGbUuLUjKIFYKNlv0HcJgItWD7WZVaG0-rXj8KUdbeC/w400-h355/Areas_of_WIPO_Domain_Name_Complainant_Activity_2021.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Author </b>WIPO <b>Licence </b><a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en" target="_blank">CC BY-SA 4.0</a> <b>Source </b><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Areas_of_WIPO_Domain_Name_Complainant_Activity_2021.png" target="_blank">Wikimedia Commons</a></span></td></tr></tbody></table><br /> <p></p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span></div><div><br /></div><div>On Sunday I discussed the <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012-02-25-en" target="_blank">Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("UDRP")</a> in <i><a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/2022/10/the-terms-that-are-incorporated-into.html" target="_blank">The Terms that are incorporated into every Agreement to register a Domain Name</a>. </i>In this article, I consider how to bring a complaint under the Policy.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Why Use the UDRP</b></div><div>A brand owner who discovers a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to his or her trade mark or trade name can usually bring an action for trade mark infringement or passing off in the English or other national courts (see <i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1998/1272.html" target="_blank">British Telecommunications Plc and others v One In A Million Ltd and others</a> </i><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 10px;">[</span>2001] EBLR 2, [1998] EWCA Civ 1272, [1998] 4 All ER 476, [1999] ETMR 61, [1998] Masons CLR 165, [1998] ITCLR 146, [1997-98] Info TLR 423, [1999] 1 WLR 903, [1999] FSR 1, [1999] WLR 903, [1999] 1 ETMR 6). The courts can sometimes grant an interim injunction within hours of the issue of a claim form and summary judgment within a few weeks if a defendant is within their jurisdiction. They can also award damages and costs which UDRP panellists cannot. However, court orders are difficult to enforce if the defendant is abroad or his identity or whereabouts are unknown and generally litigation is slow and expensive. By contrast, an application to the WIPO for the transfer of a single domain name costs US$1,500 and a decision can be expected long before the time allowed for an exchange of pleadings. The whereabouts or identity of a respondent is not an issue because the registrar is contractually bound to implement a panellists's order for the transfer of a domain name or the cancellation of a registration. </div><div><br /></div><div><b>Relevant Materials</b></div><div>The jurisdiction to transfer a domain name is contained in para 4 (a) of the UDRP which I discussed in my previous article. Brand owners or their legal representatives should also be aware of the<a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/udrp-rules-2015-03-11-en" target="_blank"> Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy</a> ("the Rules") and <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/providers-6d-2012-02-25-en" target="_blank">each service provider's</a> supplemental rules. The<a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/supplemental/eudrp/newrules.html" target="_blank"> latest version of WIPO's Supplemental Rules</a> is to be found on its website. Although there is no doctrine of<i> stare decisis </i>as such<i>, </i>panels tend to follow previous decisions. Each service provider publishes its panellists' decisions on its website. The WIPO has compiled an <a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/" target="_blank">overview of its panels' views on selected UDRP questions which is now in its third edition ("WIPO Jurisprudential Review 3.0)</a>. It also provides <a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/guide/" target="_blank">a guide to the UDRP</a>. </div><div><br /></div><div><b>Procedure</b></div><div>Domain name dispute resolution proceedings are entirely in writing. They begin when a brand owner files a <i>complaint.</i> Complaints to the WIPO can be filed <a href="https://amc.wipo.int/udrp/complaint.jsp" target="_blank">directly online</a> or on a <a href="https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/complaint-lock-eudrp.doc" target="_blank">model complaint form</a> attached to an email. Upon receiving a complaint, <a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/center/background.html" target="_blank">WIPO's Arbitration and Mediation Centre</a> checks it for formal compliance with the Rules and Supplemental Rules. Many domain name holders use businesses known as "privacy services" to hold the domain names on their behalf. The WIPO or other authorized service provider may require the disclosure of the actual holder of the domain name. When that is done, a complainant may be invited to amend his or her complaint by adding the name of the actual holder as well as the privacy service as respondents. The complaint is then served on the respondent who has 20 days in which to respond. As often as not, a respondent fails to file a <i>response </i>within that time. Failure to respond does not result automatically in an adverse decision. The <i>complaint </i>and any attachments or enclosures are sent to the panel who decides whether the complaint is made out.</div><div><br /></div><div><span face="helvetica, arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px;"><b>Identical or Confusingly Similar </b></span></div>The first element that a brand owner must prove is that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the complainant has rights. Readers should note that it is necessary to prove that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to just one trade mark and that trade mark can be registered anywhere in the world. In fact, it is not even necessary to show that a trade mark has been registered. Evidence of a right to bring an action for passing off will suffice. Lawyers acting for multinationals are tempted to refer to and exhibit their client's worldwide portfolios. There is no need for them to do so. It adds nothing to the case. Similarly, there is no need to annex authority that the ", com", ".org" or other gTLD suffix is disregarded. That is obvious. Excessive citation runs up costs and infuriates the panel who has to read all that matter for a US$1,000 fee. Identity or confusing similarity is a matter of impression and usually self-evident. <div><span face="helvetica, arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-size: 12px;"><br /></span></div>Trade mark registrations or the facts and matters giving rise to an action for passing off can conveniently be stated in para VI "Factual and Legal Grounds" of the model form. Any explanation as to why the domain name is similar to the trade mark should be inserted in para 12 A "The domain name(s) is(are) identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights."<div><br /></div><div><b>The Respondent has no Rights or Legitimate Interests in the Domain Name</b></div><div>The second probandum is that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. This is somewhat more difficult because it appears to require the complainant to prove a negative. <a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/#item21" target="_blank">Para 2.1</a> of the WIPO Jurisprudential Review 3.0 provides the following guidance:</div><blockquote>"While the overall burden of proof in UDRP proceedings is on the complainant, panels have recognized that proving a respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in a domain name may result in the often impossible task of “proving a negative”, requiring information that is often primarily within the knowledge or control of the respondent. As such, where a complainant makes out a prima facie case that the respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests, the burden of production on this element shifts to the respondent to come forward with relevant evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. If the respondent fails to come forward with such relevant evidence, the complainant is deemed to have satisfied the second element."</blockquote><p>One way of making out a <i>prima faci</i>e case is to show that none of the circumstances in para 4 (c) applies:</p><p style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 1.4rem; margin: 0px 0px 1.25rem;"></p><blockquote>"(i) before any notice to you of the dispute, your use of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or<br />(ii) you (as an individual, business, or other organization) have been commonly known by the domain name, even if you have acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or<br />(iii) you are making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue"</blockquote><p>It is also worth alleging that the use of the domain name would infringe a trade mark or constitute passing off and that the complainant granted no licence for such use. As I said above, it is rare for a respondent to file a response. It follows that the shifted burden of production is rarely rebutted.</p><p><b>Registration and Use in Bad Faith</b><br />The complainant has to show that the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. At first blush this appears to be another difficult burden to discharge as an allegation of bad faith is a serious accusation in that it connotes impropriety if not actual dishonesty. Also, a complainant must prove both registration in bad faith and use in bad faith.</p>The burden is alleviated by para 4 (b) of the UDRP which provides that "the following circumstances, in particular, but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith:" Those circumstances are as follows:<br /><div><blockquote>"(i) circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of your documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or<br />(ii) you have registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or<br />(iii) you have registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or<br />(iv) by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location."</blockquote><p>At least one of those circumstances applies to most cases, particularly the last as the disputed domain name is often used for a page with sponsored links and searches. The click-through revenues from those links and searches constitute "commercial gain". As the panel is likely to have found that the domain name was confusingly similar to the claimant's trade mark the requirements of para 4 (b) (iv) will have been satisfied,. It should be noted that the circumstances in para 4 (b) constitute only evidence of use and registration in bad faith which can be outweighed by other evidence but I have never seen it done.</p><p><b>Further Information<br /></b>I first discussed this topic in <i><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/19980207152507/http://www.lbnipc.com/domnam.htm" target="_blank">Domain Name Registration</a> </i>which appeared in <i>NIPC's Chambers Newsletter </i>for October 1997. Two years later the <a href="https://www.icann.org/en" target="_blank">Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ("ICANN")</a> adopted the UDRP which I had envisaged in that 1997 article. Shortly after the UDRP was launched, I settled one of the first complaints from the United Kingdom (and the first one ever to be settled by an English barrister) (see <i>Re Superfi.com </i>WIPO Case Number D2000-0789 <i><a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0789.html" target="_blank">Eddys (NottinghamIPO) Limited, trading as Superfi v. Mr Kingsley Smith </a> </i>7 Sept 2000). Not long afterwards, the WIPO invited me to join its <a href="https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/domains/panel/profiles/lambert-jane.pdf" target="_blank">panel</a> and I decided my first case on 4 April 2004 (see WIPO Case No. D2004-0124 <i><a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2004/d2004-0124.html" target="_blank">Microsoft Corporation v. TheBuzz Int (microsoftcore.com)</a> </i>4 April 2004). In my capacity as a panellist, I have resolved many disputes since then, As a barrister, I have advised and drafted complaints and responses for both brand owners and domain name holders.</p><p>In my next article I will; discuss responses under the UDRP. Anyone enquiring about the UDRP may call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact page </a>at other times. </p></div>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-10534045801246455812022-10-30T07:21:00.015+00:002022-10-30T08:15:59.145+00:00The Terms that are incorporated into every Agreement to register a Domain Name<p> <a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Icann_logo.svg" style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); color: #0645ad; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><img alt="File:Icann logo.svg" data-file-height="207" data-file-width="260" decoding="async" height="207" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Icann_logo.svg/260px-Icann_logo.svg.png?20101107144002" srcset="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Icann_logo.svg/390px-Icann_logo.svg.png?20101107144002 1.5x, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Icann_logo.svg/520px-Icann_logo.svg.png?20101107144002 2x" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: repeat; background-size: initial; background: url("/w/resources/src/mediawiki.action/images/checker.svg?ff513") repeat; border: 0px; height: auto; max-width: 100%; vertical-align: middle;" width="260" /></a></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span></p><p>One of the reasons why the internet works as well as it does is that there is a fast and relatively inexpensive procedure for resolving disputes between brand owners and domain name holders. That procedure is contained in a document called the <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012-02-25-en" target="_blank">Uniform Domain Name Disp</a><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012-02-25-en" target="_blank">ute Resolution Policy ("UDRP"</a>). The UDRP is incorporated by reference into every agreement for the registration of a generic, and many country-code, top-level domain names. Domain names ending in ".com", ".org" or ".biz" are examples of generic top-level domains ("gTLD"). Domain names ending in a two-letter country code such as ".nu" (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niue" target="_blank">Niue</a>). ".tv" (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuvalu" target="_blank">Tuvalu</a>) or ".ws" (Samoa) are country code top-level domains ("ccTLD").</p><p>The UDRP is incorporated into domain name registration agreements upon the insistence of a not-for-profit California company called the <a href="https://www.icann.org/en" target="_blank">Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ("ICANN")</a>. ICANN was established at the behest of the United States government to regulate the allocation of domain names. ICANN subcontracts the registration of gTLD to businesses known as "registrars" and ccTLD to national domain name registration authorities. One of the terms of ICANN's agreements with those registrars and authorities is that the registrar or authority will incorporate the UDRP into every agreement for the registration of a domain name that it enters with a third party. </p><p>Para 1 of the Policy states that the UDRP's purpose is to set forth the terms and conditions in connection with a dispute between the domain name holder and brand owner over the registration and use of an internet domain name. In the Policy the pronouns "we" and "us" refer to the registrar or other authority and "you" to the person registering, maintaining or renewing a domain name.</p><p>An important but frequently overlooked provision of the Policy is para 2 which sets out the representations and warranties that every person seeking to register, maintain or renew a domain name makes to the registrar or other authority. It will be recalled that a <i>representation</i> is an assertion as to a fact, true on the date the representation is made, that is given to induce another party to enter into a contract or take some other action and a<i> warranty </i>is a promise of indemnity if the assertion is false. These representations and warranties are as follows:</p><p>"(a) the statements that you made in your Registration Agreement are complete and accurate; </p><p>(b) to your knowledge, the registration of the domain name will not infringe upon or otherwise violate the rights of any third party; </p><p>(c) you are not registering the domain name for an unlawful purpose; and </p><p>(d) you will not knowingly use the domain name in violation of any applicable laws or regulations."</p><p>It is the responsibility of the person seeking registration, maintenance or renewal of the domain name to determine whether the domain name registration infringes or violates someone else's rights. It will be appreciated that these are onerous obligations.</p><p>Para 3 of the Policy sets out the circumstances in which a registrar or other authority may cancel, transfer or otherwise make changes to a domain name registration. These include "receipt of a decision of an Administrative Panel requiring such action in any administrative proceeding to which you were a party and which was conducted under this Policy". </p><p>Para 4 sets out <span face="helvetica, arial, sans-serif" style="color: #333333;"><span style="background-color: white;">"</span></span>the type of disputes for which you are required to submit to a mandatory administrative proceeding." Subpara (a) provides:<br /></p><blockquote><p>"<b>Applicable Disputes</b>. You are required to submit to a mandatory administrative proceeding in the event that a third party (a "complainant") asserts to the applicable Provider, in compliance with the Rules of Procedure, that</p><p>(i) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and</p><p>(ii) you have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and</p>(iii) your domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.<br /><br />In the administrative proceeding, the complainant must prove that each of these three elements are present."</blockquote><p>Para 4 states that those proceedings will be conducted before one of the following administrative-dispute-resolution service providers:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><a href="http://acdr.aipmas.org/default.aspx" target="_blank">Arab Center for Domain Name Dispute Resolution</a> </li><li><a href="https://www.adndrc.org/" target="_blank">Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre</a></li><li><a href="https://ciidrc.org/" target="_blank">Canadian International Dispute Resolution Centre</a></li><li><a href="https://adr.eu/index.php" target="_blank">The Czech Arbitration Court Centre for Internet Disputes</a></li><li><a href="https://www.adrforum.com/domain-dispute" target="_blank">National Arbitration Forum</a>, and</li><li><a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/" target="_blank">World Intellectual Property Organization ("WIPO")</a>.</li></ul><div>Each of those service providers has a list of panellists who will decide the dispute on the documents that the parties submit to them. Those documents will always include a<i> complaint</i> and exhibits known as annexures from the brand owner. Sometimes there will be a <i>response</i> from the domain name holder. After receiving the <i>complaint </i>and any <i>response </i>tha<i>t</i> may have been filed the service provider will appoint a member of its panel to determine the dispute as a sole panellist. If the respondent pays an additional fee each of the parties may choose a panellist for a three-member panel.</div><div><br /></div><div>Most panellists are lawyers specializing in intellectual property or patent or trade mark attorneys. I have served on the <a href="https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/domains/panel/profiles/lambert-jane.pdf" target="_blank">WIPO panel </a>for nearly 20 years. I have also drafted <i>complaints</i> for trade mark owners and <i>responses</i> for domain name holders. <i>Complaints</i> and <i>responses </i>are submitted on online forms. In the next and subsequent articles, I will discuss how to complete the <i>complaint </i>or <i>response </i>in a way that is likely to appeal to a panel. I will also warn of the sort of submissions that are likely to infuriate the panel. Anyone wishing to discuss this article may call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact page</a>. </div><p></p>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-62471931212714970342022-07-06T09:04:00.007+01:002022-07-06T09:13:37.693+01:00The IPR Help Desk's Domain Name Primer<p><a class="image" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Europe.svg" style="background: none rgb(248, 249, 250); clear: left; color: #0645ad; float: left; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 12.32px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;" title="Flag of the European Union"><img alt="Circle of 12 gold stars on a blue background" class="thumbborder" data-file-height="540" data-file-width="810" decoding="async" height="266" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Flag_of_Europe.svg/125px-Flag_of_Europe.svg.png" srcset="//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Flag_of_Europe.svg/188px-Flag_of_Europe.svg.png 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Flag_of_Europe.svg/250px-Flag_of_Europe.svg.png 2x" style="border: 1px solid rgb(234, 236, 240); vertical-align: middle;" width="400" /></a> </p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">J</a></span><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">ane Lambert</a></span></p>The <a href="https://intellectual-property-helpdesk.ec.europa.eu/index_en" target="_blank">IPR-Helpdesk </a>is an EU-funded service that supplies information on intellectual property to small and medium enterprises. It carries out research into IP, publishes regular newsletters and other publications and holds webinars and other events. Among its most useful publications are <a href="https://intellectual-property-helpdesk.ec.europa.eu/regional-helpdesks/european-ip-helpdesk/europe-infographics_en" target="_blank">infographics</a> that communicate essential information in a digestible format.<div><br /></div><div>The latest of those infographics is on <a href="https://intellectual-property-helpdesk.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/new-infographic-out-now-domain-names-and-cybersquatting-2022-07-04_en" target="_blank">Domain Names and Cybersquatting</a> which can be downloaded free of charge from the <a href="https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/521202f1-f1d6-11ec-a534-01aa75ed71a1/language-en" target="_blank">EU Publications Office</a>. That document explains what is a domain name, what is meant by the terms TLD (top-level domain), second-level domain and third-level domain and the difference between generic and country-code top-level domains. It discusses how to register domain names, the practice of cybersquatting and what can be done to prevent it.</div><div><br /></div><div>Readers who require further information on domain names, cybersquatting and dispute resolution may read my articles on <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/domain-names.html" target="_blank">Domain Name Disputes</a> and <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/how-to.html" target="_blank">Dispute Resolution Policies</a> and <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/domain-name-glossary.html" target="_blank">Domain Name Glossary</a>. The <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012-02-25-en" target="_blank">Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy</a> is one of the most successful alternative dispute resolution schemes in the world. For a few hundred United States dollars, trade mark owners or those who could bring an action for passing off can apply for the transfer or cancellation of a domain name that is the same as or confusingly similar to their trade mark. <br /><br />Such applications come before administrative panels (of which I am one) who decide whether the domain name is the same or confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the complainant has rights, whether the domain name holder has any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name and whether the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. If the panel finds in favour of the complainant on all those issues he or she can order the transfer of the domain name to the complainant or its cancellation, The whole process is completed within a matter of weeks. Usually, far less time than would be required for a claimant to issue and serve proceedings in the English courts and for the defendant to respond. </div><div><br /></div><div>The UDRP has been adopted by many other domain name registries including Wales (see my articles <i><a href="https://nipcwales.blogspot.com/2019/04/welsh-top-level-domain-names.html" target="_blank">Welsh Top Leval Domain Names </a> </i>12<i> </i>April 2019 and <i><a href="https://nipcwales.blogspot.com/2019/04/welsh-ip-cases-d2016-0485-aldi-gmbh-co.html" target="_blank">Welsh IP Cases: D2016-0485 ALDI GmbH & Co. KG v. Mahfuz Ali</a> </i>13 April 2019 <i>NIPC Wales</i>). Many others such as Nominet regulates the ".uk" space and the Swiss domain name authority have similar policies. To see how the process works just read my decision in <a href="https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/case.jsp?case_id=58653" target="_blank">Re D2022-1858 lancastersarchery.com</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>Readers may be interested to learn that I do not confine myself to deciding domain name disputes. I also advise and represent parties to such disputes. As a panellist, I know exactly what the tribunal that will decide the dispute is looking for. Having such insight, I can usually offer a much more successful and cost-effective service than most others. Those who want to learn more can call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 or send me a message through my<a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank"> contact form.</a></div>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-81836031511834877952022-06-11T09:04:00.007+01:002022-06-11T09:15:15.491+01:00Auntie Jane's Trade Mark Tips No 10 - Passing Off<p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhk7KnPxrNbYHOadpGNWjkwvKasFrT8uRiT1Uzop40fEGbsol1CL9qsfcPW5d6jusOvD1uFhMQ_Incb_aUeeFe_Iacp8keJYsvpBUo0CKFTcTgw7uPQoeyMyg1CHAc_PDkYE7Ini2NOt7J0z694QuM_0BEXEhwb4EpM7FFXH17vV3GPlJoWv2o_RLe/s2772/Jif_Lemon.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2181" data-original-width="2772" height="315" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhk7KnPxrNbYHOadpGNWjkwvKasFrT8uRiT1Uzop40fEGbsol1CL9qsfcPW5d6jusOvD1uFhMQ_Incb_aUeeFe_Iacp8keJYsvpBUo0CKFTcTgw7uPQoeyMyg1CHAc_PDkYE7Ini2NOt7J0z694QuM_0BEXEhwb4EpM7FFXH17vV3GPlJoWv2o_RLe/w400-h315/Jif_Lemon.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Jif Lemon</span><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Author </b>Paul Hurst <b>Licence </b><a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/deed.en" target="_blank">CC BY-SA 2.5</a> <b>Source<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jif_Lemon.jpg" target="_blank"> </a></b><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jif_Lemon.jpg" target="_blank">Wikimedia Commons</a></span></div></td></tr></tbody></table><br /> <p></p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Since 1876 it has been possible for suppliers to protect their <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/brands.html" target="_blank">brands</a> by registering signs that distinguish their goods from those of all other suppliers as <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/2017/06/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips-no-4-what.html" target="_blank">trade marks </a>with the Intellectual Property Office. There is, however, a much older judge-made protection known as the law of <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/passing-off.html" target="_blank">passing off</a>. Lord Oliver summarized that law as "no man may pass off his goods as those of another."</div><div><br /></div><div>Lord Oliver said those words in a speech in the House of Lords in a case called <i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1990/12.html" target="_blank">Reckitt and Colman Products Ltd v Borden Inc.</a></i> [1990] UKHL 12, [1990] 1 WLR 491, [1990] 1 All ER 873, [1990] RPC 341, [1990] WLR 491. For many years, the claimant company had sold lemon juice in squeezable lemon-size plastic containers like the one in the photo. They claimed that that packaging distinguished their juice from the juices of all other suppliers. When the defendant tried to supply lemon juice in squeezable lemon shape plastic containers, the claimant complained that such packaging led consumers to buy the defendant's juice in the belief that it was the claimant's. Proceedings were brought in the High Court which ended up in the House of Lords, then the highest court of appeal in the United Kingdom.</div><div><br /></div><div>Lord Oliver was one of the judges who heard that appeal. In deciding that case, he set out the elements that a complainant has to prove:<br /><blockquote>"First, he must establish a goodwill or reputation attached to the goods or services which he supplies in the mind of the purchasing public by association with the identifying "get-up" (whether it consists simply of a brand name or a trade description, or the individual features of labelling or packaging) under which his particular goods or services are offered to the public, such that the get-up is recognised by the public as distinctive specifically of the plaintiff's goods or services. Secondly, he must demonstrate a misrepresentation by the defendant to the public (whether or not intentional) leading or likely to lead the public to believe that goods or services offered by him are the goods or services of the plaintiff. Whether the public is aware of the plaintiff's identity as the manufacturer or supplier of the goods or services is immaterial, as long as they are identified with a particular source which is in fact the plaintiff. For example, if the public is accustomed to rely upon a particular brand name in purchasing goods of a particular description, it matters not at all that there is little or no public awareness of the identity of the proprietor of the brand name. Thirdly, he must demonstrate that he suffers or, in a <i>quia timet </i>action, that he is likely to suffer damage by reason of the erroneous belief engendered by the defendant's misrepresentation that the source of the defendant's goods or services is the same as the source of those offered by the plaintiff." </blockquote><p>There is considerable overlap between trade mark law and the law of passing off, Very often, brand owners sue for both causes of action. There are, however. important differences that allow claims to be brought under one head but not under the other.</p><p>Probably the most significant of those differences is that a claimant has to prove that he or she has goodwill by reference to a mark, get-up or other indicia. That usually requires evidence of sales and advertising under a mark over time. By contrast, the owner of a registered mark may sue for infringement of that mark before he or she has made a single sale, Conversely, it is sometimes possible to sue for passing off where the defendant has used a mark that cannot be registered as a trade mark.</p><p>Rights to bring actions for passing off can be important in trade mark law. One of the grounds for opposing an application for the registration of a trade mark or invalidating a registered mark is that the use of the trade mark can be prevented by an action for passing off (see s.5 (4) (a) of the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/957352/unofficial-trade-marks-act-1994.pdf" target="_blank">Trade Marks Act 1994</a>).</p>You will find my other tips <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips.html" target="_blank">indexed here</a>.<br /><br />If you are an entrepreneur, business owner or anyone else seeking guidance on UK trade mark law, I can give you up to 30 minutes of my time for initial advice and signposting. That may not be enough time to dispose of your issue but it should be enough to define it and assess what further assistance you need, what sort of professional is best placed to supply it and how and where to find such assistance.</div>
<iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="1446" scrolling="no" src="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/embed/zlb7bwf038b7ut/" style="border: none; width: 100%;" title="Embedded Wufoo Form"> <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/zlb7bwf038b7ut/">Fill out my Wufoo form!</a> </iframe>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-90668836737114787452022-05-23T22:58:00.009+01:002022-05-24T06:29:33.608+01:00Auntie Jane's Trade Mark Tips: No. 9 Infringements<p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOsx_5MSLSah_LvQQeFRB1ur-aO3QKV0M-_QKA8k3JvmKF0MdRzGWtpYTcBrta5GFp-qMiM8IXkn4bcyWdV7xb-BahM9pqC5IiuAXFf1e-sZkBwtECAAIOPQFYineVLnxbLksKJ6t72Ymwa8oQJNfmY9ShhXqfDXXJKmBi-QtztMWoxuk9UaTIbiVx/s1140/Rolls_Building,_Royal_Courts_of_Justice%20(3).jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="775" data-original-width="1140" height="218" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOsx_5MSLSah_LvQQeFRB1ur-aO3QKV0M-_QKA8k3JvmKF0MdRzGWtpYTcBrta5GFp-qMiM8IXkn4bcyWdV7xb-BahM9pqC5IiuAXFf1e-sZkBwtECAAIOPQFYineVLnxbLksKJ6t72Ymwa8oQJNfmY9ShhXqfDXXJKmBi-QtztMWoxuk9UaTIbiVx/s320/Rolls_Building,_Royal_Courts_of_Justice%20(3).jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Rolls Building</span><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Author </b>Judicial Office UK <b>Licence </b><a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en" target="_blank">CC BY-SA 4.0 </a><b>Source </b><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rolls_Building,_Royal_Courts_of_Justice.jpg" target="_blank">Wikimedia Commons</a></span></div></td></tr></tbody></table><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rolls_Building,_Royal_Courts_of_Justice.jpg" target="_blank"><br /> </a><p></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span></p><p>In my <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/2017/06/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips-no-4-what.html" target="_blank">fourth trade mark tip, "</a><i><a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/2017/06/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips-no-4-what.html" target="_blank">What is a Trade Mark?"</a> </i>I wrote that a trade mark must be capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings. That is the function of trade marks.</p><p>There are three ways in which that function can be interfered with:-</p><p>The first is by using a sign that is identical to the mark in relation to goods or services that are identical to those for which the mark is registered. That is barn door counterfeiting, There is no need to show that anyone is deceived or confused, It is actionable under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/26/section/10" target="_blank">s.10 (1)</a> of the Trade Marks Act 1994.</p><p>The second way is to use a sign that is identical or similar to the mark in respect of goods or services that are the same as or similar to those for which the mark was registered. Liability arises where there is a likelihood that the public will be confused because the sign is the same as or similar to the mark and the goods or services are the same as or similar to those for which the mark was registered. Such likelihood should include the likelihood of association with the trade mark. That is actionable under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/26/section/10" target="_blank">s,10 (2) </a>of the Act.</p><p>The third is to use a sign that is the same as or similar to a mark that has a reputation in the UK. It does not matter whether the goods for which it is used and the same or similar to those for which the mark is registered. An action arises if the use to which the sign is put takes unfair advantage of or is detrimental to the distinctive character or repute of the mark without due cause. That is actionable under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/26/section/10" target="_blank">s. 10 (3).</a><br /><br />You will find my other tips <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips.html">indexed here</a>.</p><p>If you are an entrepreneur, business owner or anyone else seeking guidance on UK trade mark law, I can give you up to 30 minutes of my time for initial advice and signposting. That may not be enough time to dispose of your issue but it should be enough to define it and assess what further assistance you need, what sort of professional is best placed to supply it and how and where to find such assistance. </p>
<iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="1446" scrolling="no" src="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/embed/zlb7bwf038b7ut/" style="border: none; width: 100%;" title="Embedded Wufoo Form"> <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/zlb7bwf038b7ut/">Fill out my Wufoo form!</a> </iframe>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-59743679600027184922021-02-13T14:06:00.004+00:002021-02-13T14:13:50.659+00:00"Can Somebody register my Sign as a British Trade Mark now that EU Trade Marks no longer apply to the UK?" <p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXXOrJ9VviRMCzbWngNgHF8_XxAYhfyn6AW09Jcck3R-sqErS4Xw1q_0AJ1qOifStkYmG_2deA1miMnKebReZ7UtfYDAdjQahYbkrYVKg5aWZ6bUFrPHz7ZOarqQB2tOfPFDS4IXiSqCc/s2048/IMG_20181010_172926+%25281%2529.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1105" data-original-width="2048" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXXOrJ9VviRMCzbWngNgHF8_XxAYhfyn6AW09Jcck3R-sqErS4Xw1q_0AJ1qOifStkYmG_2deA1miMnKebReZ7UtfYDAdjQahYbkrYVKg5aWZ6bUFrPHz7ZOarqQB2tOfPFDS4IXiSqCc/s320/IMG_20181010_172926+%25281%2529.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Menai Science Park, Anglesey</span><br /><div style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">© 2018 Jane Elizabeth Lambert </span></div></td></tr></tbody></table><br /> <p></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span></p><p>Last Tuesday I gave talks on what every startup and SME should know about IP to the <a href="https://bradfordnetwork.eventanywhere.com/combined/reception" target="_blank">BradfordNetwork</a> and the <a href="https://www.hwbmenter.cymru/en/" target="_blank">Menai Science Park Enterprise Hub</a>. You can download my slides for the <a href="https://www.slideshare.net/nipclaw/what-every-business-in-bradford-needs-to-know-about-intellectual-property" target="_blank">BradfordNetwork</a> and the <a href="https://www.slideshare.net/nipclaw/what-every-business-in-wales-needs-to-know-about-intellectual-property" target="_blank">Enterprise Hub</a> from Slideshare. At each of those talks, I was asked how to protect a brand in the UK now that the European Union trade mark no longer applies to the UK. As this question is likely to have been asked in places other than Wales and Yorkshire I decided to reply in <i>NIPC Branding. </i></p><p>The good news to people who hold EU trade marks is that your sign is still protected in the UK in respect of the same goods and/or services even though your EU trade mark ceased to apply to the UK at 23:00 on 31 Dec 2020. Art 54 (1) (a) of the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/840655/Agreement_on_the_withdrawal_of_the_United_Kingdom_of_Great_Britain_and_Northern_Ireland_from_the_European_Union_and_the_European_Atomic_Energy_Community.pdf" target="_blank">agreement by which the UK withdrew from the EU</a> provides that:<br /></p><blockquote>"the holder of a European Union trade mark registered in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council1 shall become the holder of a trade mark in the United Kingdom, consisting of the same sign, for the same goods or services;"</blockquote><p>You do not even have to pay for the registration because art 55 (1) of the same agreement states:<br /></p><blockquote>"The registration, grant or protection pursuant to Article 54(1) and (2) of this Agreement shall be carried out free of charge by the relevant entities in the United Kingdom, using the data available in the registries of the European Union Intellectual Property Office, ....."</blockquote><p>These articles were carried into effect by <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/269/regulation/2/made" target="_blank">reg 2 </a> and <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/269/schedule/1/made" target="_blank">Sched 1</a> of The Trade Marks (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (SI2019 No. 269) as amended by <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/1050/regulation/8/made" target="_blank">reg 8</a> and <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/1050/regulation/9/made" target="_blank">reg 9</a> of The Intellectual Property (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (SI 2020 No 1050).</p><p>Those regulations inserted a new s.52A and Sched. 2A into the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/957352/unofficial-trade-marks-act-1994.pdf" target="_blank">Trade Marks Act 1994:</a></p><blockquote>"Schedule 2A makes provision for European Union trade marks (including certain expired and removed marks) to be treated as registered trade marks with effect from IP completion day and about certain applications for a European Union trade mark made before IP completion day."</blockquote><p>"IP completion day" means the end of the transition period when EU law continued to apply to the UK which happened at 23:00 on 31 Dec 2020. Para 1 (1) of the new Sched, 2A, provides:<br /></p><blockquote>"A trade mark which is registered in the EUTM Register immediately before IP completion day (an “existing EUTM”) is to be treated on and after IP completion day as if an application had been made, and the trade mark had been registered, under this Act in respect of the same goods or services as the existing EUTM is registered in the EUTM Register."</blockquote><p>You don't need to do a thing unless you do not want a British registration in which case you can opt out under para 2 of the Schedule. In its new story, <i><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/intellectual-property-after-1-january-2021" target="_blank">Intellectual property after 1 January 2021</a>, </i>the IPO says:</p><blockquote>"receive a UK registration certificate, but you will be able to access details about the trade mark on GOV.UK and can take a screen shot from there as evidence of your right."</blockquote><p>So if any chance wants to try to grab your sign in the UK he or she will find his way blocked by your registration just as he or she would have done before 23:00 on 31 Dec 2020.<br /><br />Your EU registration will continue to apply to the other 27 member states of the EU in the same way as it has always done. The only problem is that you will no longer be able to seek an EU wide injunction from a court in the UK because the courts of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have ceased to be EU trade mark courts. Happily, the <a href="https://www.courts.ie/commercial-court" target="_blank">Commercial Court of the Republic of Ireland</a> is still an EU trade mark court and my colleague <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/james-bridgeman-sc-0155a519/?originalSubdomain=ie" target="_blank">James Bridgeman SC</a> who qualified as a trade mark attorney before reading for the Irish Bar can continue to represent you in that court as well as the Court of Justice of the European Union, the General Court and the courts of England and Wales.</p><p>If you want to learn more about this subject, you may want to consult <i><a href="http://nipcexit.blogspot.com/2021/01/how-brexit-has-changed-british-ip-law.html" target="_blank">How Brexit has changed IP Law</a> </i>17 Jan 2021 and my <a href="https://www.slideshare.net/nipclaw/how-brexit-has-changed-ip-law" target="_blank">presentation</a> and <a href="https://www.slideshare.net/nipclaw/ip-after-brexit" target="_blank">handout</a> on the topic on 26 Jan 2021. If you want to discuss this article with me you cn call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my contact form at <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">any time</a>.</p><p></p><p></p>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-3950979847604659282020-10-31T16:13:00.015+00:002020-10-31T16:38:20.950+00:00Small Packages - Great Idea<p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3UVN8TyUECuwFVAMhIFji0RRA36hJUhB1kk7Ac8RZ4YnaKOSLSdpzvd5ijr-OuxsdmdlwGQANtV65Xne6URUgZwildRslpbBGanw5rN2ZL4LVdM0JxVt-ZDluTGU3ov7mWgXNT42NC9Y/s960/Campus_of_the_University_of_California%252C_Irvine_%2528aerial_view%252C_circa_2006%2529.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="960" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3UVN8TyUECuwFVAMhIFji0RRA36hJUhB1kk7Ac8RZ4YnaKOSLSdpzvd5ijr-OuxsdmdlwGQANtV65Xne6URUgZwildRslpbBGanw5rN2ZL4LVdM0JxVt-ZDluTGU3ov7mWgXNT42NC9Y/w400-h300/Campus_of_the_University_of_California%252C_Irvine_%2528aerial_view%252C_circa_2006%2529.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">The University of California, Irvine</span><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Author </b><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Poppashoppa22" target="_blank">Poppashoppa22</a> <b>Licence </b><a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/deed.en" target="_blank">CC BY0SA 2.</a>5 <b>Source </b><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_Irvine" target="_blank">Wikipedia, University of California, Irvine</a></span></div></td></tr></tbody></table><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /> </span><p></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span></p><p>The <a href="https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/" target="_blank">University of California i</a>s a federal university with campuses spread across a wide geographical area rather like the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Wales" target="_blank">University of Wales</a>. I was at the <a href="https://www.ucla.edu/" target="_blank">University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)</a> which has recently celebrated its 100th anniversary. Another campus of the University is the <a href="https://uci.edu/" target="_blank">University of California, Irvine (UCI) </a> Graduates of the several campuses of the University living in the United Kingdom are kept in touch with their <i>almae matres </i>and with each other by the <a href="https://london.universityofcalifornia.edu/" target="_blank">University of California, Trust (UK)</a>.</p><p>Yesterday the Trust sent me an email headed "University of California Events - Oct 30-Nov 13, 2020". One of those events was an interview with a UCI graduate called Julie Schecter entitled "Entrepreneurship with Julie Schecter - UCI" at 20:00 UK time that very evening. It continued:<br /></p><blockquote>"Learn the challenges and rewards of starting a new business with Julie Schecter '07, founder of Small Packages during this Campuswide Honors Alumni Chapter webinar."</blockquote><p>As I specialize as an intellectual property lawyer in advising startups and other small and medium enterprises on protecting their <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/what-are-intellectual-assets.html" target="_blank">intellectual assets</a> (brands, designs, technology and works of art and literature) with <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/intellectual-property.html" target="_blank">intellectual property</a> rights and also on exploiting and enforcing those rights I registered for the webinar. I wanted to see what I could learn and also whether I could contribute to the discussion.<br /><br />Although I am many decades older than Julie, we have two things in common. We are both lawyers and we share a love of dance. Julie read law at<a href="https://hls.harvard.edu/" target="_blank"> Harvard Law School</a> which is one of the best in the United States and probably the world whereas I read for the English Bar at <a href="https://www.lincolnsinn.org.uk/" target="_blank">Lincoln's Inn </a>in London. She was a dance major at UCI. I studied economics, modern and medieval history and moral philosophy at <a href="https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/" target="_blank">St Andrews</a> graduating with honours in US history(which is why I went to graduate school in the USA). However, I helped to found the University Dance Club some 50 years ago and learned how t do my first <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_ballet#P" target="_blank">plié</a> </i>as an undergraduate. I still attend ballet class several times a week at age 72 and I blog about dance in <a href="https://jelterps.blogspot.com/" style="font-style: italic;" target="_blank">Terpsichore.</a><i> </i><br /><br />Julie's business is called <a href="https://smallpackages.co/" target="_blank">"Small Packages"</a>. She founded it in 2018. It is basically a gift service for those who want to congratulate their friends, relations and acquaintances when something good occurs in their lives such as an engagement, birth or birthday, or commiserate when something unpleasant happens like a bereavement or illness. Gift boxes come in three sizes: US$35 (£27.04), US$55 (£42.48) and US$100 (£77.25), The US$35 birthday box, for example, contains a handwritten card, candles, sweet and salty crackers (wafer biscuits), Elizabeth Gilbert's <i><a href="https://www.elizabethgilbert.com/books/big-magic/" target="_blank">Big Magic</a> </i>and a "happy mask", The US$100 "This is the worst" box contains a handwritten card, chocolate shortbread, hair turban, Mari Andrew's<i><a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/557582/am-i-there-yet-by-mari-andrew/" target="_blank"> Am I There Yet?</a>, </i>fuzzy socks, a key chain, candles and tea. </p><p>Julie describes her mission as "Take a huge bite out of the loneliness epidemic" which is a lovely idea, particularly in a country as big as the USA when a close friend or relation may be many thousands of miles away. Her service must be especially welcome with current travel and contact restrictions. Indeed, one of her gift box range is designed for folk in quarantine. </p><p>I had intended to ask Julie about raising capital as that is a problem for many of my clients who have similar businesses to Julie's. However, someone asked that question just as I was about to type mine. Her initial investment came from friends and family. More recently she has raised money through crowdfunding. I did, manage to ask her a question about intellectual property, I asked her whether she had incorporated intellectual property into her business plan. She replied that she had.<br /><br />The reason I asked that question is that a Mr Trademan of the US Trademark and Patent Office (yes that really is his name) posed it to an audience of entrepreneurs at a videotaped lecture entitled <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHDRV2NTSEk&t=303s" target="_blank">Basic Facts 01: What Every Small Business Should Know Now, Not Later</a> </i>(USPTO), Mr Trademan asked his audience of entrepreneurs and business owners how many of them had a business plan. There was a forest of raised hands. He then asked how many had incorporated trade marks into their business plans. Not a single person raised his or her hand. Julie had been very prudent in incorporating IP into her business plan right from the start but such prudence is very rare on this side of the Atlantic as it was in Mr Trademan's audience.<br /><br />Julie's company has a lot of policies that I like. For instance, she sources at least 10% of her supplies from businesses owned by African Americans. Rather than hire expensive consultants and contractors she teaches herself some basic skills. She taught herself digital marketing to conduct social media campaigns. As she says (and as I tell my clients) there is an enormous amount of information on the internet on business topics and much if it is free or inexpensive. In this country, I recommend the <a href="https://www.bl.uk/business-and-ip-centre" target="_blank">Business and IP Network</a> at the British Library and its regional partners.</p><p>The chair, Arlene Ho, asked Julie why and how she changed from law to business. She worked for a good law firm and enjoyed her job but she wanted a different challenge, Her first business was actually in dance but it did not develop as expected.<br /><br />I thoroughly enjoyed the webinar and I am very grateful to Arlene or her colleagues for announcing it in the UC Trust (UK) newsletter thereby allowing graduates of other UC campuses in the UK to attend. Not much good has come out of this murderous pandemic but perhaps the opportunity to attend webinars such as this (which I would not otherwise have attended) is part of a very threadbare silver lining. I wish Julie every success with her venture and Arlene and her colleagues at UCI all the best with their future webinars.</p>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-23135233936622027782020-02-24T15:57:00.000+00:002020-02-24T16:30:06.770+00:00Tribunal Practice Notices<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZAXF5rElONUsMiu-QspeITROIwEhebp0AmQD_7W-lwpnmYI2AmUG0Jti2KM-qC9791Fe13FHm-xvWTsRON7RPv_ixK2gSdfvkeoEE1337Qr6bNnxb-3Wmx4K1Fz_rZdhlsgrts1IUOik/s1600/IPO.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="883" data-original-width="1600" height="176" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZAXF5rElONUsMiu-QspeITROIwEhebp0AmQD_7W-lwpnmYI2AmUG0Jti2KM-qC9791Fe13FHm-xvWTsRON7RPv_ixK2gSdfvkeoEE1337Qr6bNnxb-3Wmx4K1Fz_rZdhlsgrts1IUOik/s320/IPO.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Intellectual Property Office Crown Copyright <b>Licence</b> <a href="http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/" target="_blank">OGL</a></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span><br />
<br />
Tribunal Practice Notices ("TPN") are the equivalent to practice directions in the <a href="http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil" target="_blank">Civil Procedure Rules ("CPR")</a>. They supplement the provisions of <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/694249/Patents-Rules-2007-06042018.pdf" target="_blank">The Patents Rules 2007</a>, <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/814170/Legislation-Consolidated-Trade-Mark-Rules.pdf" target="_blank">The Trade Marks Rules 2008</a> and the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/737829/Consolidated_Design_Rules.pdf" target="_blank">Registered Designs Rules 2006</a> that relate to hearings in the <a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/ipo.html" target="_blank">Intellectual Property Office ("the IPO")</a>. Unlike most of the practice directions in the CPR, they are not linked to particular rules.<br />
<br />
The first TPNs were <a href="https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140729131910/http://www.ipo.gov.uk/pro-types/pro-patent/p-law/p-tpn/p-tpn-2000/p-tpn-12000.htm" target="_blank">TPN 1/2000 Practice In Proceedings Before The Comptroller</a> and <a href="https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140729155019/http://www.ipo.gov.uk/pro-types/pro-patent/p-law/p-tpn/p-tpn-2000/p-tpn-22000.htm" target="_blank">TPN 2/2000 Costs In Proceedings Before The Comptroller</a>. They were issued on 19 April 2000 by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alison_Brimelow" target="_blank">Alison Brimelow</a> when she was Comptroller General of Patents Designs and Trade Marks and Chief Executive of the Intellectual Property Office as the Patent Office is now called.<br />
<br />
TPN 1/2000 advised customers of changes in practice in the way the Office operated as a tribunal from 26 April 2000 to simplify and improve the speed of such proceedings and thereby the costs. Some of those changes required amendment of the Patents, Trade Marks and Designs Rules in force at that time but many others were introduced by altering established formal practice. <br />
<br />
The main changes brought about by TPN 1/2000 were as follows:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<ul>
<li>"The Office and parties should endeavour to complete <i>with notice</i> proceedings within 18 months. (paragraph 7)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The periods for filing a counterstatement and evidence in patents, registered designs and design right proceedings has been shorted from two months to six weeks except when lodging an opposition, eg. opposition to amend a patent specification under rule 40(2). (paragraph 8)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The periods for filing a counterstatement and evidence in trade marks revocation (on grounds other than non use), invalidation and rectification proceedings has been shortened to six weeks. However, the period will remain at three months in opposition and revocation on grounds of non use proceedings though an additional "cooling-off" period of three months at the start opposition proceedings will be granted when sought by both parties. (paragraph 9)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Hearing Officers will have discretion to shorten prescribed periods. (paragraph 10)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The Office will set a period within which a preliminary (interlocutory) hearing should take place and give parties 14 days to agree a date in that period. The Office will fix a date if after 14 days the parties do not agree a date within this period, although Hearing Officers may override the 14 days if there are genuine difficulties. (paragraph 13)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>At the commencement of the final evidence round, the Office will aim to fix a date for a substantive hearing for approximately four months later. (paragraph 14)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The party commencing action should provide a statement of case which properly sets out the grounds on which the case against the other side is to be based. If a party fails to provide sufficient information, the Patent Office may challenge the statement. Until the statement of case is in order the proceedings will not be progressed. (paragraphs 15 to 19)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The Office has provided broad guidelines on how to set out a statement of case. (paragraphs 20 to 25)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>A declaration of the truth of the information in claims and defences is required for trade marks proceedings and encouraged in other proceedings. (paragraph 27)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The Office will accept a witness statement in evidence although Hearing Officers are authorised to require the filing of an affidavit or statutory declaration if they consider it necessary. (paragraph 30)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Exceptionally the Office is prepared to accept unsigned witness statements or unsworn statutory declarations or affidavits as meeting time deadlines provided a proper version of the evidence is filed within a specified period. The Hearing Officer may impose a cost penalty if, in the event, the formal evidence is different from that originally filed. (paragraph 31)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Where a party adduces evidence of a statement made by another person and does not call that person as a witness, the Hearing Officer may permit the other party to call that person and cross examine them. (paragraph 32)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>In deciding whether to grant specific disclosure, Hearing Officers will generally follow principles which mirror those applied by the courts. (paragraphs 33 to 37)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The Office intends issuing questionnaires on a selective basis prior to evidence rounds. (paragraph 38)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Hearing Officers will adopt the selective use of "case management conferences" taking into account the circumstances of the case, eg the need to clarify issues, the degree of complexity, any related actions and any wider public interest issues. (paragraphs 39 and 40)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Hearing Officers are also empowered to call a "pre-hearing review" prior to a hearing which will give them the opportunity to clarify matters and issue directions on the conduct of the hearing. (paragraph 41)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The Office will routinely ask parties if they have considered Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and Hearing Officers will be prepared to stay proceedings where ADR is being used or seriously considered. They may also take into account a party’s unreasonable refusal to consider ADR when awarding costs. (paragraph 42)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>In patents revocation hearings the applicant will be invited to open proceedings while in trade marks opposition hearings the opponent will be invited to open. (paragraph 43)."</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<ul>
<li>Hearing Officers will retain discretion to deal with excessively long speeches and cross examination. (paragraph 44)</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<ul>
<li>Parties will generally be expected to supply skeleton arguments and authorities at least two days before a hearing. (paragraph 45)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Adducing new evidence during a hearing will be discouraged and will only be allowed after the other party has had sufficient time to digest it. As a rule, documents will only be allowed to be introduced in cross examination which are designed to test the honesty and reliability of a witness. (paragraph 46)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The Office will encourage parties to hold hearings, case management conferences and pre-hearing reviews using telephone conferencing arrangements and video links in suitable cases. (paragraph 47)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Hearing Officers will offer parties the opportunity for proceedings to be decided without the need for a hearing. (paragraph 48)."</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
TPN 2/2000 set out the general practice with regard to costs.<br />
<br />
One of more TPNs have been issued in most of the years since 2000. Those issued before 27 July 2014 are to be found in <a href="https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140727205245/https://www.ipo.gov.uk/pro-types/pro-patent/p-law/p-tpn.htm" target="_blank">The National Archives </a> More recent ones are indexed in the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunal-practice-notices" target="_blank">Tribunal practice notices collection </a>on the British Government website.<br />
<br />
The most recent TPN is <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tribunal-practice-notice-12020-disclaimerslimitations-of-marks/tribunal-practice-notice-12020-disclaimerslimitations-of-marks" target="_blank">TPN 1/2020 Disclaimers/Limitations of marks</a> which was issued on 21 Feb 2020. This TPN reverses the previous practice of excluding from consideration disclaimed elements of a mark when determining the likelihood of confusion including the likelihood of association with an earlier mark. Paragraph 2 of the TPN states:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The element(s) of a trade mark that is (are) subject to a disclaimer will be taken into account in the assessment of a likelihood of confusion with (or other damage from) a later mark, even where the disclaimed element is the only point of similarity with the later mark. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Marks with rights limited to a specified colour (or colours) may be held to be confusingly similar to later trade marks in different colour(s), if the marks are sufficiently similar overall."</blockquote>
The reason for this change is the Court of Justice of the European Union's decision in C‑705/17, <i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2019/C70517.html" target="_blank">Patent-och registreringsverket v Mats Hansson</a> </i>ECLI:EU:C:2019:481, [2019] EUECJ C-705/17, EU:C:2019:481. Pa\ragraph [63] of the judgment states:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Article 4(1)(b) of Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks must be interpreted as precluding national legislation making provision for a disclaimer whose effect would be to exclude an element of a complex trade mark, referred to in that disclaimer, from the global analysis of the relevant factors for showing the existence of a likelihood of confusion within the meaning of that provision, or to attribute to such an element, in advance and permanently, limited importance in that analysis.”</blockquote>
Anyone wishing to discuss this article, T{N 1/2020 or TPN, in general, may call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact form</a>.Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-70581518389463147482019-12-17T11:48:00.000+00:002019-12-17T11:48:29.408+00:00Cheesy - Fromagerie Bel SA v J Sainsbury Plc<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgK4NnvzU7v5E0mkit4YiOX0BF3YqKh6T4QUcppdfce0kGO99bJ6gHg8K76K0gY_0MLTCMWYcwI0ZiulE0y2tMycBK9onCdMV78rh9wgNBL9lavbIk0wWR-mqwnOYhoLOekc8yykMIl3Lg/s1600/GB50001100002060882.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="235" data-original-width="314" height="149" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgK4NnvzU7v5E0mkit4YiOX0BF3YqKh6T4QUcppdfce0kGO99bJ6gHg8K76K0gY_0MLTCMWYcwI0ZiulE0y2tMycBK9onCdMV78rh9wgNBL9lavbIk0wWR-mqwnOYhoLOekc8yykMIl3Lg/s200/GB50001100002060882.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span><br />
<br />
It is possible for a mark to remain on the register for over 20 years, Then, suddenly, someone challenges the registration on a ground that nobody envisaged at the time of filing.<br />
<br />
Essentially that is what happened to the owner of the above three-dimensional trade mark It applied to register a chunk of cheese as a UK trade mark on 12 March 1996. The application was successful and registration was granted on 29 Aug 1997.<br />
<br />
There the mark remained undisturbed until 26 Oct 2017 when the retailer, J Sainsbury Plc, applied to the Registrar of Trade Marks for a declaration that the registration was invalid pursuant to s.47 (1) of <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/742949/Trade-Mark-Act-1994.pdf" target="_blank">The Trade Marks Act 1994.</a> That subsection provides:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The registration of a trade mark may be declared invalid on the ground
that the trade mark was registered in breach of section 3 or any of the provisions
referred to in that section (absolute grounds for refusal of registration)."</blockquote>
The original grounds for invalidation were that the trade mark does not comply with the requirements of: <blockquote class="tr_bq">
"(i) Section 3 (1) (a) of the Act because the mark consists of the goods themselves in an unadorned red wax/plastic wrapper which is customary in the trade.<br />(ii) Section 3 (1) (b) because the mark consists exclusively of the shape of the goods themselves and is devoid of any distinctive character.<br />(iii) Section 3 (1) (b) because the trade mark is not graphically represented, as required.<br />(iv) Section 3 (1) (c) because<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
a) it is customary to preserve cheese in wax/plastic wrapping,<br /> (b) certain Dutch cheeses are particularly associated with this type of wrapping<br /> (c) the dimensions used in the representation of the mark indicate the amount of cheese in the product; therefore, the mark designates the kind, quality, quantity and/or geographical origin of the goods. </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(v) Section 3 (1) (d) because the trade mark consists exclusively of a sign which has become customary in the current language or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade.<br />(vi) Section 3 (2) (a) because the trade mark consists exclusively of a shape which results from the nature of the goods themselves.<br />(vii) Section 3 (2) (b) because the trade mark consists exclusively of a shape which is necessary to achieve a technical result.<br />(viii) Section 3 (2) (c) because the trade mark consists exclusively of a shape which gives substantial value to the goods."</blockquote>
The application came on before Mr Allan James who heard the application on behalf of the Registrar. Most of those objections failed. Just one succeeded. Mr James was so unimpressed that he said:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"In my view, the way that the applicant has pleaded and pursued its application amounts to unreasonable behaviour. It has wasted a great deal of everyone’s time, including that of the proprietor, which has incurred wasted costs as a result. Taking this into account, I order Fromageries Bel S.A. to pay J Sainsbury plc the sum of £200, being the official filing fee for the application for invalidation. In the circumstances, it would, in my view, be unjust to require the proprietor to pay the applicant any more than that."</blockquote>
The ground upon which the retailer was successful was that there was an ambiguity in the description of the mark. The above photo was accompanied by the words:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The mark is limited to the colour red. The mark consists of a three dimensional shape and is limited to the dimensions shown above."</blockquote>
Me James held that that 'the colour red' in the description did not provide sufficient clarity and precision because a particular hue of red should have been specified. As a result of the ambiguity, the mark did not satisfy the requirements of s.1 (1) of the Act and could therefore not be registered without breaching s.3 (1).<br /><br />Fromageries Bek SA appealed to the High Court. The case was heard by His Honour Judge Hacon who dismissed the appeal in <i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2019/3454.html" target="_blank">Fromageries Bel SA v J Sainsbury Plc </a></i>[2019] EWHC 3454 (Ch) (12 Dec 2019). For those who are interested, I wrote a commentary on the case in <i><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/2019/12/fromageries-bel-sa-v-j-sainsbury-plc.html" target="_blank">Fromageries Bel SA v J Sainsbury Plc</a> </i>16 Dec 2019 NIPC Law. <div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The whole judgment is worth reading but perhaps the most important passages are as follows. At paragraph [63] Judge Hacon said:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Turning to marks containing colour which are not colour per se marks, it is of course the entire mark, including non-colour elements, which must be capable of distinguishing. However, the colour element may play a part in ensuring that it is and that in turn may depend on the colour being of a particular hue."</blockquote>
At paragraph [67] he added:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"It seems to me that where a mark contains colour but is not a colour per se mark, the need for precision as to hue will depend on the extent to which other elements of the mark serve to make the mark capable of distinguishing. More exactly, it will depend on the extent to which the colour of the relevant feature of the mark contributes to making the mark capable of distinguishing and whether it is likely that only a particular hue will confer on the mark that capacity to distinguish. It will always be a question of fact and degree."</blockquote>
In the case of Fromageries Bel SA's mark, the judge asked himself whether it was capable of distinguishing that company's cheese from the cheese of all other undertakings on the assumption that the hue used in the wax coating may be any hue of red which the company cares to use and indeed which it is free to vary from time to time. He reached the conclusion on the balance of probabilities that the mark could be capable of distinguishing only if a particular hue of red used on the main body of the product is associated with the cheese. It followed that the trade mark had to be limited to a single hue of red to be valid.<br />
<br />
The other important takeaway from this case concerns s.13 (1) of the Trade Marks Act 1994:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"An applicant for registration of a trade mark, or the proprietor of a registered trade mark, may;<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">
(a) disclaim any right to the exclusive use of any specified element of the trade mark, or<br />(b) agree that the rights conferred by the registration shall be subject to a specified territorial or other limitation; </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
and where the registration of a trade mark is subject to a disclaimer or limitation, the rights conferred by section 9 (rights conferred by registered trade mark) are restricted accordingly."</blockquote>
Fromageries Bel SA tried to rely on this provision to substitute a hue or Pantone for the word "red" in the above description. Judge Hacon said that this section could be used to limit the scope of a valid registration but not to correct a defect in an invalid one,<br /><br />Anyone wishing to discuss this article or trade marks generally should call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact form</a>.<br />
<br />
</div>
Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-56830822998536322932019-11-08T08:23:00.000+00:002019-11-08T08:46:14.097+00:00KidZania - a Mexican Multinational Enterprise centred on Branding<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvcoAehCu1XRnZkIWh_tJmwbTz5htS36mbT4xIU8BNS6GCRy0AqimM19kxxv74GV0rfhtzefk8qznhp-qrgo-MGlEuiEL7ZC12Attt2l9AZ3F4fRG24m5YsTBPvnh2OeBJ3qii6MeQABU/s1600/800px-Kidzania_Bangkok%252C_Dec_2017.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="800" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvcoAehCu1XRnZkIWh_tJmwbTz5htS36mbT4xIU8BNS6GCRy0AqimM19kxxv74GV0rfhtzefk8qznhp-qrgo-MGlEuiEL7ZC12Attt2l9AZ3F4fRG24m5YsTBPvnh2OeBJ3qii6MeQABU/s320/800px-Kidzania_Bangkok%252C_Dec_2017.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Bangkok KidZania</span><br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Author </b><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Banej" target="_blank">Banej</a> <b>Licence <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en" target="_blank">CC</a></b><a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en" target="_blank"> BY-SA 3.0<b> </b></a> <b>Source </b>Wikipedia KidZania</span></div>
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">
</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span><br />
<br />
Following a visit to the <a href="https://kidzania.co.uk/" target="_blank">London KidZania</a>, I wrote <i><a href="https://4-5london.blogspot.com/2019/01/branding-catching-them-young.html" target="_blank">Branding - Catching Them </a>Young</i> in<i> </i>NIPC London on 2 Jan 2019. KidZania describes itself as "An Indoor City Run by Kids." The London KidZania is located in the <a href="https://uk.westfield.com/london" target="_blank">Westfield shopping centre</a> in Shepherds Bush and consists of 75,000 square feet of replica child-size shops and offices on two floors where children aged between 4 and 14 can try their hands at all sorts of occupations.<br />
<br />
As in real life, brands are everywhere. I spotted Alder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Aljazeera Media Network, the Bank of England, British Airways, Cadbury, Costa, Dorsett International, Eat Natural, Gourmet Burger Kitchen, Global, H & M, Hamptons, Innocent, K-Market, Metro, Middlesex County Cricket Club, Mission Deli, Nintendo, People's Dispensary for Sick Animals, Roland, Snazaroo, The Original Tour and many others which is how I chose the title for my article. It is, therefore, no surprise that the <a href="https://www.wipo.int/portal/en/index.html" target="_blank">World Intellectual Property Organization</a> ("the WIPO"), the UN specialist agency for intellectual property, has published <i>KidZania: get ready for a better world </i>by Catherine Jewell in the latest issue of its magazine (see <i><a href="https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/wipo_magazine/en/pdf/2019/wipo_pub_121_2019_05.pdf" target="_blank">WIPO Magazine</a></i> No 5 Oct 2019 ay page 22),<br />
<br />
Jewell's article takes the form of an interview with Maricruz Arrubarrena, the outgoing Chief Executive Officer of KidZania’s Mexican operations. He explains that<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"KidZania is two businesses in one. It is a family entertainment and learning centre and it is a platform for brands to engage with families."</blockquote>
The KidZania sites at <a href="https://santafe.kidzania.com/" target="_blank">Santa Fe</a>, <a href="http://monterrey.kidzania.com/" target="_blank">Monterrey</a>, <a href="http://cuicuilco.kidzania.com/" target="_blank">Cuicuilco</a> and <a href="https://guadalajara.kidzania.com/en-mx" target="_blank">Guadalajara</a> are run by KidZania S.A.P.I. de C.V. The sites in all other countries are operated by franchisees. Mr Arrubarrena says that "KidZania provides the intellectual property (IP),
designs, themes, know-how, and operational manuals,
and works with the franchisee to develop the master plan
and choose the right location." He adds:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The team responsible for managing and monitoring franchisee relationships, known as the KidZania Intelligence Agency, plays an important role in monitoring and upholding quality benchmarks. Control is very important in franchising. That is why we have very strict franchising contracts in place. Poor execution and bad service can damage our reputation."</blockquote>
On being asked "What role does IP play in the company?", Mr Arrubarrena replies: "IP is central to our business model." His company owns the IP in
the architectural designs and all the creative elements
associated with establishing a KidZania facility and actively protects its intellectual assets.<br />
<br />
KidZania works with 900 brands. On being asked why KidZania works with so many brands and what is in it for them, Mr Arrubarrena says:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Our industry partners represent the city’s businesses and activities and are a key part of the KidZania experience. Their participation adds authenticity and credibility to our activities. By working with us, brands have an opportunity to give something back to the community by supporting children’s learning. It also offers an opportunity for them to learn about the evolving tastes and needs of children and parents and to cultivate brand recognition and loyalty among them,"</blockquote>
With franchisees and partners in many countries, KidZania S.A.P.I. de C.V makes full use of the Madrid system to register and manage its trade marks.<br />
<br />
The Mexican company's business model has been spectacularly successful. Jewell notes that "KidZania has become one of the world’s
fastest growing learning and entertainment brands." In my article, I noted that "KidZania is a transatlantic concept but from Mexico rather than the United States" It is possible for a powerful, fast-growing, multinational business centred on branding to be developed outside North America, Western Europe or North Asia.<br />
<br />
Anyone wishing to discuss this article or branding and franchising generally should call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 during UK office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact form</a>.Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-6386456492086276722019-02-04T17:58:00.000+00:002019-02-04T18:19:38.990+00:00The Trade Mark Regulations 2018 - Grounds for Refusal relating to only some Goods or Services<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPCuz2knNg-SDMQUefY1oLArAP3wTnCv-ruKokY8oeURVn_zRWJ7LWdcZm0E_dSJJ0QpB5w6fTiFOfq3L9lxlhWQ5kGVbSvnEWO7Mnk34cHzD8pFLmq5vuudjLtkZCTMjdoYGhbAw0WCU/s1600/Jane+Lambert.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="365" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPCuz2knNg-SDMQUefY1oLArAP3wTnCv-ruKokY8oeURVn_zRWJ7LWdcZm0E_dSJJ0QpB5w6fTiFOfq3L9lxlhWQ5kGVbSvnEWO7Mnk34cHzD8pFLmq5vuudjLtkZCTMjdoYGhbAw0WCU/s200/Jane+Lambert.jpg" width="145" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
A quickie this week you will be glad to hear. As I said in <i><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-new-trade-marks-law.html" target="_blank">The New Trade Marks Law</a> </i>(12 Jan 2019, NIPC Law), changes have been made to the UK's <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/742949/Trade-Mark-Act-1994.pdf" target="_blank">Trade Marks Act 1994</a> to implement <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32015L2436" target="_blank">Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Text with EEA relevance) OJ L 336, 23.12.2015, p. 1–26</a>.<br />
<br />
Art 7 of the Directive contains a provision that did not appear in <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/95/oj" target="_blank">Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: center;">
"Article 7</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Grounds for refusal or invalidity relating to only some of the goods or services</b></div>
Where grounds for refusal of registration or for invalidity of a trade mark exist in respect of only some of the goods or services for which that trade mark has been applied or registered, refusal of registration or invalidity shall cover those goods or services only."</blockquote>
Art I also mentioned in <i>The New Trade Marks Law, </i>Directive 2015.2436 has been implemented by the Trade Marks Regulations 2018, <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/825/regulation/6/made" target="_blank">Reg 6 </a>of those regulations inserts a new s.5A into the 1994 Act:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: center;">
“<b>5A Grounds for refusal relating to only some of the goods or services</b></div>
Where grounds for refusal of an application for registration of a trade mark exist in respect of only some of the goods or services in respect of which the trade mark is applied for, the application is to be refused in relation to those goods and services only.”.</blockquote>
This new section was described as a clarification in a table on page 29 of the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/682232/trade-mark-directive.pdf" target="_blank">Intellectual Property Office's consultation on the implementation of Directive 2015/2436</a>. It probably makes little difference in practice in the UK.<br />
<br />
Anyone wishing to discuss this article or trade marks, in general, may call me on 020 7404 55252 during office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact page.</a>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-68919015660737778132019-01-26T09:07:00.000+00:002019-01-26T09:07:13.631+00:00The Trade Marks Regulations 2018 - Relative Grounds of Refusal<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5eeGxEGGXv3iGhDo6D8koripTvGL3Dl_p7fQj872LmDHXxmzHWEJjUuB-_Wo_r-6SkqDna-JU044AocEIUiyMXiXqRk4kak8DIBPU_mgP7-h3arGfTgycMpami9IS46FZGawxxSXSGac/s1600/1800227_10205755573307138_3035350222533176100_n.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="960" data-original-width="960" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5eeGxEGGXv3iGhDo6D8koripTvGL3Dl_p7fQj872LmDHXxmzHWEJjUuB-_Wo_r-6SkqDna-JU044AocEIUiyMXiXqRk4kak8DIBPU_mgP7-h3arGfTgycMpami9IS46FZGawxxSXSGac/s200/1800227_10205755573307138_3035350222533176100_n.jpg" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Yesterday being Burns Night I could not resist this photo of an outsize mouse from the <a href="http://www.burnsmuseum.org.uk/" target="_blank">Burns Birthplace Museum</a> in Alloway. This mouse may well be "sleekit" but hardly "wee" and not obviously timorous either.<br />
<br />
In this fourth article on the new trade marks law, I consider <i>relative grounds of refusal. </i>These are circumstances in which<a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/glossary.html" target="_blank"> the Intellectual Property Office</a> can refuse to register a sign as a trade mark on the ground that the registration would be incompatible with an earlier trade mark registration or application or some other intellectual property right. This article should be read in conjunction with <i><a href="https://nipclaw.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-new-trade-marks-law.html" target="_blank">The New Trade Marks Law </a></i>which I published in <i>NIPC Law </i>on 12 Jan 2019.<br />
<br />
Readers will recall that the law has changed because certain articles of <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32015L2436" target="_blank">Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks </a>came into force on 14 Jan 2019. Art 55 repealed <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/95/oj" target="_blank">Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Codified version)</a> with effect from 15 Jan 2019. Art 54 (1) required member states to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the Directive by 14 Jan 2019. The legislation that implements that requirement is a statutory instrument known as <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/825/made" target="_blank">The Trade Marks Regulations 2018</a>.<br />
<br />
The first two paragraphs of art 5 of Directive 2015/2436 are very similar to the first two paragraphs of art 4 of the previous Directive. Art 5 (3) (a) of the new Directive is similar to art 4 (3) of the previous one. The main difference is the insertion of new subparagraphs (b) and (c):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Furthermore, a trade mark shall not be registered or, if registered, shall be liable to be declared invalid where:<br />
..............................................<br />
(b) an agent or representative of the proprietor of the trade mark applies for registration thereof in his own name without the proprietor's authorisation, unless the agent or representative justifies his action;<br />
(c) and to the extent that, pursuant to Union legislation or the law of the Member State concerned providing for protection of designations of origin and geographical indications:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(i) an application for a designation of origin or a geographical indication had already been submitted in accordance with Union legislation or the law of the Member State concerned prior to the date of application for registration of the trade mark or the date of the priority claimed for the application, subject to its subsequent registration;<br />
(ii) that designation of origin or geographical indication confers on the person authorised under the relevant law to exercise the rights arising therefrom the right to prohibit the use of a subsequent trade mark."</blockquote>
</blockquote>
S.5 of the Trade Marks Act 1994 provides for relative grounds of refusal in the United Kingdom and the changes to s.5 that are needed for compliance with Directive 2015/2436 are made by <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/825/regulation/5/made" target="_blank">reg 5 </a>of the Trade Marks Regulations 2018.<br />
<br />
That regulation goes further than is necessary for compliance with Directive 2015?2436:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"5.—(1) Section 5 is amended as follows. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(2) After subsection (3), insert—<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
'(3A) Subsection (3) applies irrespective of whether the goods and services for which the trade mark is to be registered are identical with, similar to or not similar to those for which the earlier trade mark is protected.'</blockquote>
(3) In subsection (4) (a), for 'trade, or' substitute 'trade, where the condition in subsection (4A) is met,'.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(4) In subsection (4), after paragraph (a) insert—<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
'(aa) by virtue of any provision of EU law, or any enactment or rule of law, providing for protection of designations of origin or geographical indications, where the condition in subsection (4B) is met, or'.</blockquote>
(5) In subsection (4) (b)— </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(a) after 'paragraph (a)' insert 'or (aa)'; and<br />
(b) omit ', design right or registered designs' and substitute 'or the law relating to industrial property rights. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(6) After subsection (4), insert—<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
'(4A) The condition mentioned in subsection (4)(a) is that the rights to the unregistered trade mark or other sign were acquired prior to the date of application for registration of the trade mark or date of the priority claimed for that application.<br />
(4B) The condition mentioned in subsection 4(aa) is that—<br />
(a) an application for a designation of origin or a geographical indication has been submitted prior to the date of application for registration of the trade mark or the date of the priority claimed for that application, and<br />
(b ) the designation of origin or (as the case may be) geographical indication is subsequently registered.'.</blockquote>
(7) After subsection (5) insert—<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
'(6) Where an agent or representative (“R”) of the proprietor of a trade mark applies, without the proprietor’s consent, for the registration of the trade mark in R’s own name, the application is to be refused unless R justifies that action.'.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Those changes appear in the<a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/742949/Trade-Mark-Act-1994.pdf" target="_blank"> IPO's unofficial consolidation of the Trade Marks Act 1994</a>.<br />
<br />
The new subsection (3A) inserted by reg 5 (2) reinforces the deletion of the words<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"is to be registered for goods or services which are not similar to those for which the earlier trade mark is protected" </blockquote>
from <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/26/section/5/enacted" target="_blank">s. 5 (3) (b) of the Act as originally enacted</a> by<a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/946/regulation/7/made" target="_blank"> reg 7 (1)</a> of the Trade Marks (Proof of Use) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004 No 946) in order to give effect to the Court of Justice's decision in <i><a href="https://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2003/C29200.html" target="_blank">Case C-292/00, Davidoff & Cie and another v Gofkid Ltd.</a></i> [2003] FSR 28, [2003] EUECJ C-292/00, [2003] ECR I-389, [2003] ECR I-00389, [2003] 1 WLR 1714.<br />
<br />
Art 5 (3) (b) of Directive 2015/2436 is implemented by the insertion of the new subsection (6). Paragraph 9 of the IPO's <i><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/implementation-of-the-trade-mark-directive-2015/implementation-of-the-eu-trade-mark-directive-2015" target="_blank">Guidance Implementation of the EU Trade Mark Directive 2015</a> </i>explains the reason for the insertion:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"If someone acting as your agent or representative applies for, or has registered, your trade mark in their name without your permission, you can seek to remedy the situation. The options for doing so are changing slightly, and mean that they now apply to any owner of a trade mark, whether they are based in the UK or abroad."</blockquote>
The next paragraph adds:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"If the trade mark has been applied for, but has not been registered, you may seek to have the application refused by <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/objecting-to-other-peoples-trade-marks-and-the-legal-costs#opposing-a-published-trade-mark" target="_blank">opposing</a> it. You can only do so if the mark has been published. If the mark is still pending you can ask the IPO to notify you when it is published, by filing an <a href="https://www.gov.uk/track-a-trade-mark" target="_blank">e-Alert</a>. You can check the status of the mark using the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/search-for-trademark" target="_blank">search facility</a> on the IPO’s website."</blockquote>
There are parallel amendments to s.47 to permit invalidity proceedings on that ground.<br />
<br />
Reg 5 (4), (5) and (6) implement art 5 (3) (c) of Directive 2015/2436.<br />
<br />
Anyone wishing to discuss this article or trade mark law generally should call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact form.</a>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-92054889707210324512019-01-18T12:37:00.000+00:002019-01-18T12:40:01.920+00:00The Trade Marks Regulations 2018 - Absolute Grounds of Refusal<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-9D-8sqlATWZtoP2So1rOFd0O7agNfPWaEy8BpiriqoNNI4Lk_GWbrooPA7cpOMsNOMg1uWuX8-aLySLTN6pTUvb_Z2by9j84gQDJvW3WtTaQrSruKAUjw5UbVsP_RyJu8UHo4-gmFws/s1600/IMG_20170612_140339.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1200" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-9D-8sqlATWZtoP2So1rOFd0O7agNfPWaEy8BpiriqoNNI4Lk_GWbrooPA7cpOMsNOMg1uWuX8-aLySLTN6pTUvb_Z2by9j84gQDJvW3WtTaQrSruKAUjw5UbVsP_RyJu8UHo4-gmFws/s320/IMG_20170612_140339.jpg" width="240" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
This is the third of my articles on the changes to UK trade mark law brought about by the implementation of <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32015L2436" target="_blank">Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks</a> on 14 Jan 2019. It is to be read in conjunction with <i><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-new-trade-marks-law.html" target="_blank">The New Trade Marks Law</a> </i>which I published in <i>NIPC Law </i>on Saturday, 12 Jan 2019.<br />
<br />
Art 4 (1) of the Directive lists signs that should not be registered as trade marks or, if registered, should be liable to be declared invalid:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"(a) signs which cannot constitute a trade mark;<br />
(b) trade marks which are devoid of any distinctive character;<br />
(c) trade marks which consist exclusively of signs or indications which may serve, in trade, to designate the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, or the time of production of the goods or of rendering of the service, or other characteristics of the goods or services;<br />
(d) trade marks which consist exclusively of signs or indications which have become customary in the current language or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade;<br />
(e) signs which consist exclusively of:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(i) the shape, or another characteristic, which results from the nature of the goods themselves;<br />
(ii) the shape, or another characteristic, of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result;<br />
(iii) the shape, or another characteristic, which gives substantial value to the goods;</blockquote>
(f) trade marks which are contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality;<br />
(g) trade marks which are of such a nature as to deceive the public, for instance, as to the nature, quality or geographical origin of the goods or service;<br />
(h) trade marks which have not been authorised by the competent authorities and are to be refused or invalidated pursuant to Article 6ter of the Paris Convention;<br />
(i) trade marks which are excluded from registration pursuant to Union legislation or the national law of the Member State concerned, or to international agreements to which the Union or the Member State concerned is party, providing for protection of designations of origin and geographical indications;<br />
(j) trade marks which are excluded from registration pursuant to Union legislation or international agreements to which the Union is party, providing for protection of traditional terms for wine;<br />
(k) trade marks which are excluded from registration pursuant to Union legislation or international agreements to which the Union is party, providing for protection of traditional specialities guaranteed;<br />
(l) trade marks which consist of, or reproduce in their essential elements, an earlier plant variety denomination registered in accordance with Union legislation or the national law of the Member State concerned, or international agreements to which the Union or the Member State concerned is party, providing protection for plant variety rights, and which are in respect of plant varieties of the same or closely related species."</blockquote>
These are known as "absolute grounds of refusal."<br />
<br />
There are rather more grounds in this list than in the previous directive. The main changes are the substitution of the words in art 4 (1) (e) of the 2015 Directive for those in art 3 (1) (e) of the previous one and the addition of paragraphs (i) to (l) in the new directive. These are implemented by reg 4 of <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/825/made" target="_blank">The Trade Marks Regulations 2018:</a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"(1) Section 3 is amended as follows.<br />
(2) In subsection (2), after “the shape” in each place insert “, or another characteristic,”.<br />
(3) In subsection (4)(<a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/825/made#f00007">7</a>), after “EU law” insert “other than law relating to trade marks”.<br />
(4) After subsection (4), insert—<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“(4A) A trade mark is not to be registered if its registration is prohibited by or under—<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(a) any enactment or rule of law,<br />
(b) any provision of EU law, or<br />
(c) any international agreement to which the United Kingdom or the EU is a party,</blockquote>
providing for the protection of designations of origin or geographical indications.<br />
(4B) A trade mark is not to be registered if its registration is prohibited by or under—<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(a) any provision of EU law, or<br />
(b) any international agreement to which the EU is a party,<br />
providing for the protection of traditional terms for wine or traditional specialities guaranteed.</blockquote>
(4C) A trade mark is not to be registered if it—<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(a) consists of, or reproduces in its essential elements, an earlier plant variety denomination registered as mentioned in subsection (4D), and<br />
(b) is in respect of plant varieties of the same or closely related species.</blockquote>
(4D) Subsection (4C)(a) refers to registration in accordance with any—<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(a) enactment or rule of law,<br />
(b) provision of EU law, or<br />
(c) international agreement to which the United Kingdom or the EU is a part<br />
providing for the protection of plant variety rights.”</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Those amendments have been incorporated into the<a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/742949/Trade-Mark-Act-1994.pdf" target="_blank"> Intellectual Property Office's unofficial consolidation of the Trade Marks Act 1994. </a><br />
<br />
The reason for reg 4 (2) is given in the first paragraph of section 2 of the guidance note<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/implementation-of-the-trade-mark-directive-2015/implementation-of-the-eu-trade-mark-directive-2015" style="font-style: italic;" target="_blank"> Implementation of the EU Trade Mark Directive 2015</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Marks which consist exclusively of shapes cannot be registered if the shape itself performs a purely technical function, adds value to the goods or results from the nature of the goods. This kind of prohibition has now been extended to cover not just shapes, but any characteristic which is intrinsic to the goods applied for. For example, a repetitive high pitched sound would be considered to be an intrinsic part of a fire alarm. An application for a mark which therefore consists of such a sound, applied for in relation to fire alarms, is likely to be subject to an objection under these provisions."</blockquote>
The reason for the other changes is in paragraph (15) of the recitals:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"In order to ensure that the levels of protection afforded to geographical indications by Union legislation and national law are applied in a uniform and exhaustive manner in the examination of absolute and relative grounds for refusal throughout the Union, this Directive should include the same provisions in relation to geographical indications as contained in Regulation (EC) No 207/2009. Furthermore, it is appropriate to ensure that the scope of absolute grounds is extended to also cover protected traditional terms for wine and traditional specialties guaranteed."</blockquote>
There is nothing in the recitals on plant breeders' rights<br />
<br />
Anyone wishing to discuss this article or trade marks generally should call me on 020 7404 5252 or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact page. </a> Finally, if anyone is curious about the photo, it was taken at the summit of the<a href="https://www.visitpeakdistrict.com/inspiration/blog/read/2017/06/west-nab-curiosities-of-the-peak-district-b43" target="_blank"> West Nab</a> which is near Holmfirth in the Yorkshire Pennines. A beautiful spot which I strongly recommend.Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-2237245589224504522019-01-16T11:10:00.000+00:002019-01-16T11:13:25.253+00:00The Trade Marks Regulations 2918 - Registrable Signs<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhb_chAVMFQv3We8doqV5_H-CjhlEKFNq2WiUmu05gLflPM1httqX9b45fPYlGDvUTkn4BY4Go5JyNFu-SsjIoYtbXmb042r9jHkjI__-wDbKcLerrR_c_4Naw9oUicwNqCJlktoQVHb3A/s1600/jelyerps.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="160" data-original-width="160" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhb_chAVMFQv3We8doqV5_H-CjhlEKFNq2WiUmu05gLflPM1httqX9b45fPYlGDvUTkn4BY4Go5JyNFu-SsjIoYtbXmb042r9jHkjI__-wDbKcLerrR_c_4Naw9oUicwNqCJlktoQVHb3A/s1600/jelyerps.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
This is the second of my articles on the new trade marks law. It should be read in conjunction with my <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-new-trade-marks-law.html" target="_blank">introduction and overview</a> which I published in <i>NIPC Law</i> on Saturday. Readers will recall that <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32015L2436" target="_blank">Directive 2015/2436 </a> repeals <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/95/oj" target="_blank">Directive 2008/95/EC </a> with effect from 15 Jan 2019 and requires member states to transpose the most important provisions of Directive 2015/2436 into their laws by the 14 Jan 2019. The statutory instrument that implements Directive 2015/2436 is the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/825/made" target="_blank">Trade Marks Regulations 2018 (SI 2018 No 825</a>.<br />
<br />
One of the most important changes to have been brought about by the Directive is the widening of the range of signs that can be registered as trade marks. Art 2 of Directive 2009/95/EC provided:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"A trade mark may consist of any signs capable of being represented graphically, particularly words, including personal names, designs, letters, numerals, the shape of goods or of their packaging, provided that such signs are capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings."</blockquote>
This definition was transposed into s.1 (1) of the Trade Marks Act 1994:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"In this Act a “trade mark” means any sign capable of being represented graphically which is capable of distinguishing goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings."</blockquote>
The words "capable of being represented graphically" excluded marks that could not be described by letters, numbers or any other form of notation.<br />
<br />
Art 3 of Directive 2015/2436 offers the following definition in place of the previous one:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"A trade mark may consist of any signs, in particular words, including personal names, or designs, letters, numerals, colours, the shape of goods or of the packaging of goods, or sounds, provided that such signs are capable of:<br />
(a) distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings; and<br />
(b) being represented on the register in a manner which enables the competent authorities and the public to determine the clear and precise subject matter of the protection afforded to its proprietor."</blockquote>
Accordingly, reg 3 of the Trade Marks Regulations 2018 provides:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"In section 1, for subsection (1) substitute— </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
'(1) In this Act “trade mark” means any sign which is capable— </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(a) of being represented in the register in a manner which enables the registrar and other competent authorities and the public to determine the clear and precise subject matter of the protection afforded to the proprietor, and</blockquote>
<blockquote>
(b) of distinguishing goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings. </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote>
A trade mark may, in particular, consist of words (including personal names), designs, letters, numerals, colours, sounds or the shape of goods or their packaging.'”</blockquote>
</blockquote>
The substitution has required a consequential amendment of s.32. Reg 18 inserts the following words after "mark" in subsection 2 (d): "which is capable of being represented in the register in a manner which enables the registrar and other competent authorities and the public to determine the clear and precise subject matter of the protection afforded to the proprietor”.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In its guidance<i> <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/implementation-of-the-trade-mark-directive-2015/implementation-of-the-eu-trade-mark-directive-2015" target="_blank">Implementation of the EU Trade Mark Directive 2015</a></i> the Intellectual Property Office explains:</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"When filing your application, you will no longer be required to always provide a graphic (visual) representation of your trade mark. You can instead present your mark in a wider range of electronic formats, such as in an MP3 or MP4 format. This makes it easier to show more precisely any marks which incorporate, for example, movement or sounds. You will need to ensure that your mark is presented clearly and precisely so that others can understand what it is."</blockquote>
An applicant that wishes to register such a mark must do so online. The mark may be in one of the following formats:<br />
<ul>
<li>Shapes: OBJ, STL and X3D</li>
<li>Figurative, pattern, colour: JPEG</li>
<li>Sound: MP3</li>
<li>Motion, multi-media and hologram: MP4</li>
</ul>
The note adds the file should be no more than 20 megabytes (MB) in total, per application. In the case of an application for a trade mark that relates to sound, moving images, hologram or a multimedia trade mark, the MP3 file cannot exceed 2 MB and the MP4 may not exceed 8000 kilobytes per second.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Anyone wishing to discuss this article or the Trade Marks Regulations 2018 generally should call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact form.</a></div>
Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-78728837947909064772019-01-14T09:32:00.000+00:002019-01-16T08:58:26.418+00:00The Trade Mark Regulations 2018 - Citation, commencement and interoretation<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4GIbxKLoFK6ETB3FdcWejG_2qhCubsOrEUrAXz35U-H4bwHO49zvn9N5uVTbWGEkO9o72ac0F2xZGV9zTqNRMQDkAqFHT_31qoB6OYQ1g9w-Hs8FliCTQU6LquWRdclt8QnWrhIQF8sg/s1600/JEL.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="146" data-original-width="147" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4GIbxKLoFK6ETB3FdcWejG_2qhCubsOrEUrAXz35U-H4bwHO49zvn9N5uVTbWGEkO9o72ac0F2xZGV9zTqNRMQDkAqFHT_31qoB6OYQ1g9w-Hs8FliCTQU6LquWRdclt8QnWrhIQF8sg/s1600/JEL.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
As I pointed out in <i><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-new-trade-marks-law.html" target="_blank">The New Trade Marks Law</a> </i>12 Jan 2019 trade mark law in the UK and throughout the EU is changing today. <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32015L2436" target="_blank">Directive 2015/2436 </a> repeals <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/95/oj" target="_blank">Directive 2008/95/EC </a> with effect from 15 Jan 2019 and requires member states to transpose its most important provisions with effect from today. Directive 2015/2436 is implemented by the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/825/made" target="_blank">Trade Marks Regulations 2018 (SI 2018 No 825)</a> which came into force today, I introduced those regulations and outlined their structure in my previous article. As promised in that article I shall discuss its provisions in more detail in this and subsequent articles in this blog.<br />
<br />
The regulations are divided into 5 Parts the first of which concerns "Citation, commencement and interpretation. Reg 1 provides:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"(1) These Regulations may be cited as the Trade Marks Regulations 2018 and come into force on 14th January 2019.<br />
(2) In these Regulations—<br />
“the 1994 Act” means the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/742949/Trade-Mark-Act-1994.pdf" target="_blank">Trade Marks Act 1994;</a>“the CTM Regulations” means the Community Trade Mark Regulations 2006;<br />
“the International Registration Order” means the Trade Marks (International Registration) Order 2008;<br />
“the Rules” means the Trade Marks Rules 2008."</blockquote>
Part 2 of the Regulations, amends the 1994 Act. Part 3 the Rules and Part 4<a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/1027/contents/made" target="_blank"> The Community Trade Mark Regulations 2006 </a>as amended by <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1959/contents/made" target="_blank">The Community Trade Mark (Amendment) Regulations 2008</a>, <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/1043/contents" target="_blank">The Treaty of Lisbon (Changes in Terminology) Order 2011</a>, <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/299/contents/made" target="_blank">The European Trade Mark Regulations 2016</a> and the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/14/contents" target="_blank">Intellectual Property Unjustified Threats Act 2017</a> and <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/2206/contents/made" target="_blank">The Trade Marks (International Registration) Order 2008</a>.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Anyone wishing to discuss this article or the Trade Marks Regulations 2018 generally should call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact form.</a></div>
Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-35212068426045029232018-10-06T00:35:00.000+01:002019-02-07T07:39:55.477+00:00Geographical Indications after Brexit<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgU9-VAv5DynOPbz0YsYExrq6d9pE_k0eC4dZaATUfZ3vaFCg7I2TTbZ-aW4KqCFEmV2uOto6GfPlJadG-pORHxbYvGVbT0DoRS0iVeCwfXwH1FNS5ZoF-Eri4odCEmoQ1vqFr1eEOFxp0/s1600/Blue_Stilton_Quarter_Front.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="700" data-original-width="903" height="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgU9-VAv5DynOPbz0YsYExrq6d9pE_k0eC4dZaATUfZ3vaFCg7I2TTbZ-aW4KqCFEmV2uOto6GfPlJadG-pORHxbYvGVbT0DoRS0iVeCwfXwH1FNS5ZoF-Eri4odCEmoQ1vqFr1eEOFxp0/s400/Blue_Stilton_Quarter_Front.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Stilton Cheese<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Author </b>Dominik Hundhammer</span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Licence </b>Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 unported</span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Source </b><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blue_Stilton_Quarter_Front.jpg" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a></span></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <br /><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><br /></a> <span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span><br />
<br />
According to the <a href="http://www.wipo.int/geo_indications/en/" target="_blank">WIPO </a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"A geographical indication (GI) is a sign used on products that have a specific geographical origin and possess qualities or a reputation that are due to that origin. In order to function as a GI, a sign must identify a product as originating in a given place. In addition, the qualities, characteristics or reputation of the product should be essentially due to the place of origin. Since the qualities depend on the geographical place of production, there is a clear link between the product and its original place of production."</blockquote>
As I noted in <i><a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/geographical-indications.html" target="_blank">Geographical Indications</a> </i>27 May 2010 parties to the WTO Agreement are required to protect such signs by <a href="https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_04b_e.htm#3" target="_blank">arts 22</a> and 23 of the <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/ip-glossary-t.html" target="_blank">Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights</a> and art 10<i>bis </i>of the <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.com/p/ip-glossary.html" target="_blank">Paris Convention.</a><br />
<br />
As I also noted in <i>Geographical Indications </i>HM government discharges those international obligations through trade mark law, the action for passing off and special EU legislation. The EU legislation will cease to apply to the UK after 29 March 2019 except to the extent that it is preserved by s.2 and s.3 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018.<br />
<br />
Paragraph 39 of the white paper on <i><a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/725288/The_future_relationship_between_the_United_Kingdom_and_the_European_Union.pdf" target="_blank">The future relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union</a> </i>states:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The UK will be establishing its own GI scheme after exit, consistent with the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS). This new UK framework will go beyond the requirements of TRIPS, and will provide a clear and simple set of rules on GIs, and continuous protection for UK GIs in the UK. The scheme will be open to new applications, from both UK and non-UK applicants, from the day it enters into force."</blockquote>
If the UK leaves the EU with a withdrawal agreement the legislation for this new scheme will be passed in the implementation period that will subsist between 30 March 2019 and 31 Dec 2020.<br />
<br />
On 24 Sept 2018 the government published <i><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/protecting-geographical-food-and-drink-names-if-theres-no-brexit-deal/producing-food-products-protected-by-a-geographical-indication-if-theres-no-brexit-deal" target="_blank">Producing food products protected by a ‘geographical indication’ if there’s no Brexit deal</a> </i>setting out its proposals for protecting geographical indications if there is no withdrawal agreement:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"When we leave the EU we will set up our own GI schemes which will be WTO TRIPS compliant, broadly mirror the current EU regime and be no more burdensome to producers. Details to be explored in a public consultation include the UK GI logo and appeals process. The protections will be similar to those enjoyed now by UK GI producers, with all 86 UK GIs given new UK GI status automatically. The UK would no longer be required to recognise EU GI status. EU producers would be able to apply for UK GI status. We will be publishing guidance on the UK GI schemes in early 2019."</blockquote>
HMG expects the EU to continue to protect British products after Brexit but, should that not be the case, it advises producers to apply for GI protection as third country producers or the registration of their signs with the EU Intellectual Property Office as collective or certification marks,<br />
<br />
Anyone wishing to discuss this article or geographical indications generally should call me on 020 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact form.</a>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-46169917495518874792017-10-26T15:43:00.002+01:002017-10-27T19:34:05.181+01:00WIPO Domain Name Panellists' Meeting 2017<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEil_nKZSccNU1G9IiUBDBSPjhkvejrwJG88mqj7xg8F9jX9By79k0aajz1KZoptFbrHrwViNMHYQwlwf_kf4W3-6gURR-mQyZ4Q0xcCp2rOgRlaOotEQHJ68PSe4aJT1qmWwfSpGb4L6JI/s1600/wipo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="150" data-original-width="200" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEil_nKZSccNU1G9IiUBDBSPjhkvejrwJG88mqj7xg8F9jX9By79k0aajz1KZoptFbrHrwViNMHYQwlwf_kf4W3-6gURR-mQyZ4Q0xcCp2rOgRlaOotEQHJ68PSe4aJT1qmWwfSpGb4L6JI/s320/wipo.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">(c) 2017 Jane Elizabeth Lambert: all rights reserved</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/profile.html" target="_blank">jane Lambert</a></span><br />
<br />
Every year the <a href="http://www.wipo.int/" target="_blank">WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization)</a> invites its <a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/neutrals/" target="_blank">panel of neutrals</a> to its headquarters in Geneva for a day's CPD training. It usually takes place on the third Monday of October though there have been years when it has taken place before and after that date. I am a member of the panel and I have attended this event every year since 2005.<br />
<br />
The day focuses on practical issues in <a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.co.uk/p/domain-names.html" target="_blank">domain name dispute resolution</a> and particularly the <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/policy-2012-02-25-en" target="_blank">UDRP (Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy</a>) but there is always some discussion on wider issues. Immediately before<a href="http://www.wipo.int/about-wipo/en/dgo/" target="_blank"> Francis Gurry</a> became Director-General the highpoint of the day for me was his summary of important developments in intellectual property law and that was often my main motivation for attending the event. In recent years he has been unable to attend every panellists' meeting in person, but he nearly always manages to send us a video message. This year the high point was a talk by a senior executive of one of the world's leading domain name registries entitled "DNS Industry Highlights" and an update on <a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.co.uk/p/domain-name-glossary.html" target="_blank">new gTLDs</a> by officials of <a href="https://www.inta.org/Pages/Home.aspx" target="_blank">INTA</a> and the WIPO.<br />
<br />
After Dr Gurry's video and a welcome from our chair, Erik Wibers, the meeting began with a resumé of the WIPO's activities in relation to domain name dispute resolution since last year's meeting. The year ended 31 Dec 2016 was a busy year for the WIPO with 3,036 case filings under the UDRP (a 10% increase over the previous year) and more than 1,200 new gTLDs operational (see <i><a href="http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2017/article_0003.html" target="_blank">WIPO Cybersquatting Cases Hit Record in 2016, Driven by New Top-Level Domain Names</a> </i>16 March 2017). The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Centre has also been appointed as a dispute resolution service provider for ".eu" and many other country code TLDs (see<i><a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/new/eu.html" target="_blank"> New .eu domain name ADR service</a> </i>and<br />
<i><a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/cctld/" target="_blank">Domain Name Dispute Resolution Service for Country Code Top Level Domains (ccTLDs)</a></i>).<br />
<div>
<a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/" target="_blank"><br /></a></div>
<div>
Another important development has been the publication of a new <a href="http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/" target="_blank"><i>WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions</i>, Third Edition (“WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0”).</a> This is an analysis of panellists' decisions on various issues under the UDRP. It is important reading for panellists and parties' legal representatives. Most of the talks addressed aspects of the Overview and were given by senior colleagues on the WIPO panel.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If anyone wants to discuss this port or domain name dispute resolution generally, call me on +44 (0)20 7404 5252 during office hours or send me a message through my <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/nipc-law-contact-jane-lambert/" target="_blank">contact form</a>.</div>
Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-34241430195743414732017-09-04T13:44:00.001+01:002022-05-24T06:34:44.886+01:00Auntie Jane's Trade Mark Tips: No 8 - Oppositions in the Trade Mark Registry<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZAXF5rElONUsMiu-QspeITROIwEhebp0AmQD_7W-lwpnmYI2AmUG0Jti2KM-qC9791Fe13FHm-xvWTsRON7RPv_ixK2gSdfvkeoEE1337Qr6bNnxb-3Wmx4K1Fz_rZdhlsgrts1IUOik/s1600/IPO.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="883" data-original-width="1600" height="176" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZAXF5rElONUsMiu-QspeITROIwEhebp0AmQD_7W-lwpnmYI2AmUG0Jti2KM-qC9791Fe13FHm-xvWTsRON7RPv_ixK2gSdfvkeoEE1337Qr6bNnxb-3Wmx4K1Fz_rZdhlsgrts1IUOik/s320/IPO.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Intellectual Property Office in Newport</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/profile.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Jane Lambert</span></a><br />
<br />
In <a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.co.uk/2017/07/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips-no-7-some.html" target="_blank">my last trade mark tip</a>, I talked about publication and some of the consequences. In most cases, there are no consequences at all. Your application is published in the Trade Marks Journal and nobody bats an eyelid. If there are no objections the application proceeds to registration as the <a href="https://www.ipo.gov.uk/t-tmj/tm-journals/2017-035/index.html" target="_blank">infographic</a> indicates. But sometimes the <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/ipo.html" target="_blank">Intellectual Property Office</a> receives third party observations which the examiner considers and or even an opposition.<br />
<br />
An "opposition" is an application to the Intellectual Property Office to stop the registration of the sign that you want to register as a trade mark. It can be made on any or all of the <i>absolute grounds for refusal</i> mentioned in my <a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips-no-6-some.html" target="_blank">sixth trade mark tip</a> and/or the grounds that the objector has an earlier trade mark or an earlier right under s.5 of the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/610778/Unofficial-consolidated-version-Trade-Marks-Act-1994-as-amended.pdf" target="_blank">Trade Marks Act 1994</a>. An "earlier trade mark" is a trade mark that has been registered for the UK or the EU, an international mark, an application for any of those marks, or a mark that is protected as a well-known mark under the Paris Convention. An "earlier right" is the right to bring an action for passing off, copyright or any other IP right infringement or some other claim that would prevent your using the trade mark. These are known as "relative grounds for refusal".<br />
<br />
Your first inkling that you may have a problem could be a letter from the patent or trade mark attorneys or solicitors for the objector setting out the objection and the reasons for it and inviting you to withdraw your trade mark application. Sometimes it is accompanied by a <a href="https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-threaten-to-oppose" target="_blank">form TM7A or notice of threatened opposition</a>. This is one of the times when you may need legal advice either from a barrister or solicitor specializing in IP law or a trade mark or patent attorney.<br />
<br />
If you decide to proceed with your application, the objector may issue opposition proceedings which he or she does by filling in a form <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/613402/TM7_EUIPO.pdf" target="_blank">TM7 </a>or a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/570765/TM7F.pdf" target="_blank">TM7F</a>. The objector (who has now become an "opponent") will fill in a TM7F if he or she wants a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trade-marks-fast-track/fast-track-opposition" target="_blank">fast track opposition</a>. Fast track proceedings are available where the opposition is based on s.5 (1) or (2) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 and the application to register the earlier mark was made less than 5 years ago. The main advantage is that costs awards are limited to £500 but the disadvantage is that there is not usually a hearing. In all other cases, opposition proceedings are to be launched with a form TM7. If you want to defend your application you must file a notice of defence and counterstatement in <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/508969/TM8_EUIPO.pdf" target="_blank">form TM8</a> within 2 months of the service of form TM7.<br />
<br />
I described what happens next in some detail in <i><a href="http://4-5london.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/oppositions-in-trade-marks-registry.html" target="_blank">Oppositions in the IPO's Trade Marks Registry</a> </i>on 12 Aug 2015 in NIPC London. Basically, the case goes before a hearing officer who may give a preliminary indication as to how he thinks the case will go. If the case proceeds, the hearing officer will direct the parties to file evidence. If you are unable to resolve your dispute opposition through direct negotiation or perhaps mediation the hearing officer may decide the case on the written materials only or order a hearing if you or the opponent so wishes. That will usually take place at the Intellectual Property Office in Newport with one or both of the parties sitting in London or occasionally elsewhere. It tends to follow the usual course of civil proceedings with the opponent opening and closing and the applicant responding. Judgment is usually reserved for several weeks and is delivered in writing. An unsuccessful party may appeal either to a tribunal within the IPO known as "the appointed person" or to the <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/chancery-division.html" target="_blank">Chancery Division </a>of the High Court.<br />
<br />
If the opposition fails either before the hearing officer or on appeal the trade mark application to register the trade mark proceeds to grant. If it succeeds the application is stopped in its tracks.<br />
<br />You will find my other tips <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips.html" target="_blank">indexed here</a>.<div><br /></div><div>If you are an entrepreneur, business owner or anyone else seeking guidance on UK trade mark law, I can give you up to 30 minutes of my time for initial advice and signposting. That may not be enough time to dispose of your issue but it should be enough to define it and assess what further assistance you need, what sort of professional is best placed to supply it and how and where to find such assistance.<br /><br /><br /></div>
<iframe height="1446" title="Embedded Wufoo Form" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width:100%;border:none" src="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/embed/zlb7bwf038b7ut/"> <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/zlb7bwf038b7ut/">Fill out my Wufoo form!</a> </iframe>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-56721748922305068862017-07-27T07:58:00.003+01:002022-05-24T06:39:17.260+01:00Auntie Jane's Trade Mark Tips: No. 7 - Some more Things that can go wrong<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUfylCXT0ZWIFCexrbYQe5ODDLVwa0PY__WsAw5skkeDEuyJcJS79vsFwC_yYOzHmCfwuEx3Vbp1dCQu-asFbokJLAN9A9diJvOVGaZj9FQPXBJaRqqmAVSzrFCLLH3jp9roF9adzGq1c/s1600/Sports_Model_John_Quinlan_Autographed_Muay_Thai_Boxing_Gloves.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="569" data-original-width="721" height="252" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUfylCXT0ZWIFCexrbYQe5ODDLVwa0PY__WsAw5skkeDEuyJcJS79vsFwC_yYOzHmCfwuEx3Vbp1dCQu-asFbokJLAN9A9diJvOVGaZj9FQPXBJaRqqmAVSzrFCLLH3jp9roF9adzGq1c/s320/Sports_Model_John_Quinlan_Autographed_Muay_Thai_Boxing_Gloves.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Autho</b>r <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Julieb2768&action=edit&redlink=1" target="_blank">JulieB2768</a><br /><b>Licence: </b><a class="extiw" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Creative_Commons" style="background: none rgb(249, 249, 249); color: #bb6633; font-family: sans-serif; text-align: center;" target="_blank" title="w:en:Creative Commons">Creative Commons</a><span face="sans-serif" style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #222222; text-align: center;"> </span><a class="external text" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en" rel="nofollow" style="color: #663366; font-family: sans-serif; padding-right: 13px; text-align: center; text-decoration-line: none;">Attribution-Share Alike 3.0</a>unported<span face="sans-serif" style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #222222; text-align: center;"> </span><b> </b></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span><br />
<br />
Since my last trade mark tip on 15 June 2017, <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/ipo.html" target="_blank">the IPO</a> has published a timeline of the <i><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/628744/Trade_Marks_Timeline.pdf" target="_blank">Process for applying to register a trade mark</a>. </i>It's a really useful graphic which does a lot of my work for me,<br />
<br />
We are now at stage 6 - "<a href="https://www.gov.uk/check-trade-marks-journal" target="_blank">Publication</a>." <br />
<br />
If you go back to the timeline you will see a note in brackets. If the examiner has no objections your application will be published in the trade mark journal for 2 months which can be extended to 3 during which time anybody can make "third party observations."<br /><br />That is true but not the note is incomplete in several important respects which will become apparent if you click the number 6 or the accompanying note on the graphic. The graphic links to a page entitled <a href="https://www.gov.uk/check-trade-marks-journal" target="_blank">"Check the Trade Marks Journal"</a>.<br />
<br />
For most people, the <i>Trade Marks Journal </i>is about as interesting as the telephone directory and equally impenetrable but it will be examined avidly by businesses called "watch services" whose job is to spot applications for trade marks that might possibly conflict with another mark. It may also be read by your competitors who fear you may be up to something but don't yet know what and possibly by busybodies with more time on their hands than is good for them. They are the ones who could delay or even defeat your trade mark application and they will certainly waste your time and cost you money, Ugh!<br />
<br />
If you instructed a patent or trade mark attorney to make your application on your behalf there is a good chance that most of the busybodies and maybe some of your competitors will back off because they know that your attorney will respond if they make an objection. But if they think you are on your own they may make a "third party observation" or even launch an "opposition."<br />
<br />
Now oppositions are something you really have to worry about because they go before a hearing officer whom you may remember from <a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips-no-6-some.html" target="_blank">my last tip.</a> In that article, I said that hearing officers decide disputes between applicants for trade marks and examiners. These are called "ex parte" hearings because they are between you and the examiner. Hearings between you and people who don't want you to get or keep a trade mark are called "inter partes" which literally means "between other parties". "Inter partes" proceedings are much more like trials in the civil courts than "ex parte" hearings. Parties are represented by barristers, solicitors or attorneys and the loser has to pay the winner some costs. As Mr Trump might tweet if he is a few letters short of 140, "bad news" or even "very bad news".<br />
<br />
Much less worrisome are "third party observations" which are made under s.38 (3) of the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/610778/Unofficial-consolidated-version-Trade-Marks-Act-1994-as-amended.pdf" target="_blank">Trade Marks Act 1994</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Where an application has been published, any person may, at any time before the registration of the trade mark, make observations in writing to the registrar as to whether the trade mark should be registered; and the registrar shall inform the applicant of any such observations."</blockquote>
The next paragraph adds:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"A person who makes observations does not thereby become a party to the
proceedings on the application."</blockquote>
If you click the link "object to a trade mark application" link on the "Check the Trade Marks Journal" page, you will be taken to a page headed <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/objecting-to-other-peoples-trade-marks-and-the-legal-costs" target="_blank">"Objecting to other peoples trade marks and the legal costs"</a> You will find that most of that page is on oppositions but there are the following lines on third party observations:<br />
<blockquote>
"At any point after we have accepted and published an application for registration, and before it is actually registered, anyone can make what we call ‘third party observations’.<br />You can tell us if you think that we accepted the application in error. You must bring to our attention any relevant facts of which we may not have been aware at the time we accepted the application.<br />Making a third party observation is not a formal legal action, and we are not bound to act on them. We may rely on evidence given in an observation to support any later objection to the application.<br />There are several ways to file third party observations with us."</blockquote>
I wouldn;t bother clicking the link under "file" because it is mainly about patents. Basically, you can send your observations by post, fax, email or traipse down to Newport and hand them over to reception. If you do go to Newport you might like to check out what's at the <a href="http://newportlive.co.uk/venues/the-riverfront" target="_blank">Riverfront Theatre</a> where you might see Ballet Cymru if you are very lucky and the excavations and museum at<a href="http://cadw.gov.wales/daysout/Caerleon-roman-fortress-baths/?lang=en" target="_blank"> Caerleon</a> (see <a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips-no-2-eu.html" target="_blank">Tip #2</a>).<br />
<br />
Well, that's all for now folks. Next tip will be about Oppositions.<br /><br />Meanwhile. third party observations put me in mind of Alexander Pope:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer,<br />And without sneering, teach the rest to sneer;<br />Willing to wound, and yet afraid to strike,<br />Just hint a fault, and hesitate dislike;<br />Alike reserv'd to blame, or to commend,<br />A tim'rous foe, and a suspicious friend."</blockquote><p>You will find my other tips <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips.html">indexed here</a>.</p><p>If you are an entrepreneur, business owner or anyone else seeking guidance on UK trade mark law, I can give you up to 30 minutes of my time for initial advice and signposting. That may not be enough time to dispose of your issue but it should be enough to define it and assess what further assistance you need, what sort of professional is best placed to supply it and how and where to find such assistance. </p><p> </p>
<br />
<iframe height="1446" title="Embedded Wufoo Form" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width:100%;border:none" src="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/embed/zlb7bwf038b7ut/"> <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/zlb7bwf038b7ut/">Fill out my Wufoo form!</a> </iframe>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-68387606810976297942017-06-15T09:39:00.002+01:002022-05-24T06:45:45.198+01:00Auntie Jane's Trade Mark Tips: No. 6 - Some of the Things that can go wrong<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0d_pXSGRhtIJMzZ9NyCCPuo-X2UDZQfwGehzL4aT_PUT92ekkmXewVTyX3pevjRgen4cgyXOq5fB6sFe8hzr06V9CwoW4wyNPIm36k4OH8QxPzhVN5BSEnoWL4mhaBIVe36ImgvtOYms/s1600/800px-Banane-A-05_cropped.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="539" data-original-width="800" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0d_pXSGRhtIJMzZ9NyCCPuo-X2UDZQfwGehzL4aT_PUT92ekkmXewVTyX3pevjRgen4cgyXOq5fB6sFe8hzr06V9CwoW4wyNPIm36k4OH8QxPzhVN5BSEnoWL4mhaBIVe36ImgvtOYms/s400/800px-Banane-A-05_cropped.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Author <a class="gr-progress" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Priwo" target="_blank">Priwo</a><br />Source <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_peel" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a><br />
<br />
There are all sorts of reasons why your application to register a mark might fail.<br />
<br />
The official who examines your application ("the examiner") may consider that your mark falls within a number of statutory exclusions. For a start, the examiner may consider that the subject matter of your application is not even a trade mark, possibly because it is not a sign, or perhaps because it can't be expressed in writing or doesn't distinguish your goods and services from those of your competitors.<br />
<br />
Even if it is a trade mark, the examiner may object to it on the grounds that it is not distinctive, that it is descriptive of the goods or services, or common to the trade. He or she may consider your proposed mark to be offensive or it may be too similar to a royal, national or other protected emblem. Those objections are called "absolute grounds for refusal" and are set out in sections 3 and 4 of the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/610778/Unofficial-consolidated-version-Trade-Marks-Act-1994-as-amended.pdf" target="_blank">Trade Marks Act 1994</a>.<br />
<br />
Wherever possible, the examiner will give you an opportunity to overcome the objections. If you fail to take advantage of that opportunity or if the examiner believes that the objection cannot be overcome he or she may refuse your application.<br />
<br />
If you think the examiner is wrong you can appeal against his decision to the Registrar of Trade Marks (that is to say the Comptroller or Chief Executive of the IPO). The Registrar will appoint an official called "a hearing officer" to consider your appeal. I have described the appeal procedure in <i><a href="http://4-5london.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/if-examiner-says-no-ex-parte-hearings.html" target="_blank">"If the examiner says "no" - ex parte hearings in the Trade Marks Registry"</a> </i>10 Aug 2015 NIPC London. That is where I or some other specialist intellectual property barrister can often help. We can advise you of your chances of success and, if necessary, represent you at the hearing before the hearing officer.<br />
<br />
Even if the examiner has no objection to your application or you manage to overcome any objection that he or she raises, you may not be out of the woods. Someone else may object to your application and I will consider that problem next time.<br />
<br />
Until then, I leave you with my case note on T-397/09 <i>Prinz von Hannover v OHIM </i> [2011] EUECJ T-397/09 (<i><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/trade-marks-prince-ernst-august-of.html" target="_blank">Trade Marks: Prince Ernst August of Hanover and Brunswick etc v OHIM</a></i> 6 June 2011 NIPC Law). Cheeky wasn't he!<br /><p>You will find my other tips <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips.html">indexed here</a>.</p><p>If you are an entrepreneur, business owner or anyone else seeking guidance on UK trade mark law, I can give you up to 30 minutes of my time for initial advice and signposting. That may not be enough time to dispose of your issue but it should be enough to define it and assess what further assistance you need, what sort of professional is best placed to supply it and how and where to find such assistance. </p><br />
<iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="1446" scrolling="no" src="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/embed/zlb7bwf038b7ut/" style="border: none; width: 100%;" title="Embedded Wufoo Form"> <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/zlb7bwf038b7ut/">Fill out my Wufoo form!</a> </iframe>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-62617399976716406442017-06-13T15:12:00.002+01:002022-05-24T06:48:28.479+01:00Auntie Jane's Trade Mark Tips: No. 5 - How do I register a Trade Mark?<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-tEjIxbuULQKe3USeMwicFRzIMD1xrWsh3cOXrhWsGx17sbkiJSLBtdsu-BLVDtDdJl0_VMpptzic-fTMLwuGs2E-_WaDpT71T8KBnRHJ2VzO-MUGf_gFD609dmcu-vM4rRj-ztvKgxE/s1600/JEL.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="146" data-original-width="147" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-tEjIxbuULQKe3USeMwicFRzIMD1xrWsh3cOXrhWsGx17sbkiJSLBtdsu-BLVDtDdJl0_VMpptzic-fTMLwuGs2E-_WaDpT71T8KBnRHJ2VzO-MUGf_gFD609dmcu-vM4rRj-ztvKgxE/s1600/JEL.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Probably the best advice I can give to an entrepreneur or some other business owner who wants to register a <a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips-no-4-what.html" target="_blank">trade mark</a> is: consult a trade mark attorney. In <i><a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/can-i-apply-for-trade-mark-by-myself-or.html" target="_blank">Can I apply for a Trade Mark by myself or must I instruct an Attorney?</a> </i>31 May 2017 I advised that it is possible to apply for a trade mark without an attorney, that it has been done many times before and that unrepresented applicants can expect a certain amount of practical help from the <a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/ipo.html" target="_blank">Intellectual Property Office</a> ("IPO") but I would not recommend it. I cautioned that it is a lot of trouble to save a few hundred pounds and it could result in a lot of extra expense as there are many pitfalls in the process.<br />
<br />
In that article, I directed readers to the "<i>Find an Expert</i>" section of the <a href="https://www.citma.org.uk/home" target="_blank">Chartered Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys' website</a> or suggested that they might attend an IP clinic or even have a word with me. The fee that any of them would charge for taking your instructions, ascertaining your needs and preparing your application would be chickenfeed compared to the cost of your time in learning how to do all that for yourself. If you try to do it yourself there is a much higher risk of something going wrong. And in the very unlikely case that an attorney gets it badly wrong, he or she is regulated and insured against professional negligence whereas you are not.<br />
<br />
For those who chose not to take my advice, I gave a number of tips. They are worth reading again even if you do instruct your attorney because you will find it easier to instruct your attorney and the attorney will find it easier to advise you if you know what is going on. If you want to register an EU trade mark you should also read the<b> </b><a href="https://www.iprhelpdesk.eu/sites/default/files/documents/IPR-Chart_EU-trade-mark.pdf?pk_campaign=Newsletter492&pk_kwd=news2" target="_blank">EU Trade Mark fact sheet</a> published by the IPR Helpdesk.<br />
<br />
Your application to register a mark does not mean that it will be accepted. In tomorrow's tip, I will consider some of the things that could possibly go wrong. Theresa May will tell you all about that.<br /><p>You will find my other tips <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips.html">indexed here</a>.</p><p>If you are an entrepreneur, business owner or anyone else seeking guidance on UK trade mark law, I can give you up to 30 minutes of my time for initial advice and signposting. That may not be enough time to dispose of your issue but it should be enough to define it and assess what further assistance you need, what sort of professional is best placed to supply it and how and where to find such assistance. </p>
<iframe height="1446" title="Embedded Wufoo Form" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width:100%;border:none" src="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/embed/zlb7bwf038b7ut/"> <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/zlb7bwf038b7ut/">Fill out my Wufoo form!</a> </iframe>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-38528060947588754902017-06-12T09:41:00.007+01:002022-05-24T07:01:11.345+01:00Auntie Jane's Trade Mark Tips: No. 4 - "What is a Trade Mark?"<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRQjhiXPtX3BqNKWjwyzKJbHu2Ke7_eXu6LQ5jscIzL04F9yhImGxkeuvDapv-HDRbwA9_ygk4pbaFK0f-7QCpmFhtMqiq0slKRp9dJgZQn6w14J3LCjkFGZWyeD6j-0ZnJbLiQb71ZOA/s1600/Beehivepubsign.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="427" data-original-width="640" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRQjhiXPtX3BqNKWjwyzKJbHu2Ke7_eXu6LQ5jscIzL04F9yhImGxkeuvDapv-HDRbwA9_ygk4pbaFK0f-7QCpmFhtMqiq0slKRp9dJgZQn6w14J3LCjkFGZWyeD6j-0ZnJbLiQb71ZOA/s400/Beehivepubsign.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The Beehive Pub Sign in Grantham<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Author </b><a href="http://www.geograph.org.uk/profile/1904" target="_blank">Richard Croft</a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 2.0 Licence<br /><b>Source </b><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grantham" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a></span></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Updated 23 May 2022<br /><br /><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a><br />
<br />
Lots of things can be trade marks.<br />
<br />
S.1 (1) of our <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/610778/Unofficial-consolidated-version-Trade-Marks-Act-1994-as-amended.pdf" target="_blank">Trade Marks Act 1994 </a>defines a trade mark as <br /><blockquote>"any sign which is capable- <div> (a) of being represented in the register in a manner which enables the registrar and other competent
authorities and thepublic to determine the clear and precise subject matter of the protection afforded
to the proprietor,and </div><div>(b) of distinguishing goods or services of one undertaking from those of other
undertakings."</div></blockquote><div>Hannah Roberts mentioned some of the more unusual trade mark applications and registrations in her article <i><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/unusual-celebrity-company-trademark-applications-disputes-2016-12?r=US&IR=T" target="_blank">"11 of the most unusual company and celebrity trademark applications and disputes"</a> </i>31 Dec 2016 Business Insider UK.<br />
<br />
The definition was recently changed to take account of smells because nobody could figure out how to express a perfume or other aroma in writing. <br />
<br />
Here's a question to ponder. Could a pub sign be a trade mark? And if so, could the sign for <i>The Beehive</i> pub in Grantham which consists of a hive of been fall within the definition? I discussed the issue in <i><a href="http://4-5ipem.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/what-has-intellectual-property-got-to.html" target="_blank">What has intellectual property got to do with Grantham?</a> </i>4 Sept 2014 NIPC East Midlands. Do you agree?<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Grantham, incidentally, is a very beautiful market town not far from the A1 and on the railway line London and Scotland, the North East and Yorkshire. It is famous for its parish church, its grammar school where Sir Isaac Newton was a student, for the birthplace of our first and, so far, only successful woman prime minister, <a href="https://www.gravityfields.co.uk/" target="_blank">Gravity Fields</a> (its biennial arts and science festival) and the magnificent <a href="http://www.chantrydancecompany.org/" target="_blank">Chantry Dance Company</a> and <a href="http://www.chantry-school.org/" target="_blank">Chantry School of Contemporary and Balletic Arts.</a></div><div><br /></div><div>You will find my other tips <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips.html" target="_blank">indexed here</a>.</div><div><p>If you are an entrepreneur, business owner or anyone else seeking guidance on UK trade mark law, I can give you up to 30 minutes of my time for initial advice and signposting. That may not be enough time to dispose of your issue but it should be enough to define it and assess what further assistance you need, what sort of professional is best placed to supply it and how and where to find such assistance. </p></div><div><br /></div>
</div>
<iframe height="1446" title="Embedded Wufoo Form" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width:100%;border:none" src="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/embed/zlb7bwf038b7ut/"> <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/zlb7bwf038b7ut/">Fill out my Wufoo form!</a> </iframe>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8434134075439741929.post-80992438238181646552017-06-10T10:03:00.004+01:002022-05-24T07:03:25.082+01:00Auntie Jane's Trade Mark Tips: No. 3 - Where to find the Law<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgD9jTB6z-JTHe-uijGKwSpWuXMdKBEHToC7wPExScrWRGaAGDvUZ_KyBRXuW05Lhsfz_3hdgxZE2YhMo7nog0XC9umDy4NCflAjFMzZ136Kzk33TZBmwRFMVJWmUMpRFkyi2G9sCk9yhE/s1600/wildys.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="654" height="293" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgD9jTB6z-JTHe-uijGKwSpWuXMdKBEHToC7wPExScrWRGaAGDvUZ_KyBRXuW05Lhsfz_3hdgxZE2YhMo7nog0XC9umDy4NCflAjFMzZ136Kzk33TZBmwRFMVJWmUMpRFkyi2G9sCk9yhE/s320/wildys.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Wildy's Book Shop<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;"><b>Photo </b>Elisa Rolle<br />Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 international licence<br /><b>Source </b><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln%27s_Inn" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a></span></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-size: x-small;">Updated 23 May 2022</span><br />
<br /><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/p/profile.html" target="_blank">Jane Lambert</a></span><br />
<br />
Obviously, you find law in a law book and you find law books at a legal bookseller. And here's a picture of one that is nearly 200 years old. <a href="http://www.wildy.com/" target="_blank">Wildy & Sons</a> positioned strategically between the <a href="https://courttribunalfinder.service.gov.uk/courts/royal-courts-of-justice" target="_blank">Royal Courts of Justice</a> and the barristers and other legal professionals of Lincoln's Inn is one of the sights of London. It is almost next door to <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Stars,_Holborn" target="_blank">The Seven Stars</a>, </i>one of the best and oldest pubs in London.<br />
<br />
But I digress. This is what you could ask for were you ever to visit Wildy's.<br />
<br />
In <i><a href="http://nipc-branding.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips-no-2-eu.html" target="_blank">Auntie Jane's Trade Mark Tips No 2, </a></i>I told you about <i>Briitish trade marks</i> which protect brands in the UK only and <i>EU trade marks </i>which protect them throughout the whole of the European Union.<br />
<br />
The law that governs British trade marks is the Trade Marks Act 1994. That Act has been amended several times since it was first enacted and you can find a convenient though unofficial consolidation on the IPO website at<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/610778/Unofficial-consolidated-version-Trade-Marks-Act-1994-as-amended.pdf" target="_blank"> Unofficial Consolidated versionTrade Mark Act 1994 as amended</a>. The Act allows ministers to make rules for the operation of the Act which you will find in <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/610778/Unofficial-consolidated-version-Trade-Marks-Act-1994-as-amended.pdf" target="_blank">Consolidated Trade Mark Rules</a> on the same website. Our Act was passed to give effect to the <a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1456313878873&uri=CELEX:32008L0095" target="_blank">Trade Mark Directive (Directive 2008/95/EC)</a> which is the ultimate source of our trade mark legislation.<br />
<br />
The law that governs EU trade marks is <a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1461325727753&uri=CELEX:02009R0207-20160323" target="_blank">Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 Feb 2009 ("the EU Trade Mark Regulation")</a>. If you compare the Regulation with the Directive you will find many similarities. That is not surprising because both sets of legislation were made by the European Council and both need to comply with international agreements such as the <a href="http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/text.jsp?file_id=288514" target="_blank">Paris Convention for the Protection of Intellectual Property</a> and the <a href="https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_01_e.htm" target="_blank">Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights ("TRIPS").</a><br />
<br />
From time to time disputes arise as to the meaning and effect of the above legislation which sometimes go to court. The ultimate authority on EU law is the Court of Justice of the European Union. The highest court of the United Kingdom is the Supreme Court. Important decisions are also made by the Senior Courts of England and Wales, their equivalents in Scotland and Northern Ireland and IPO hearing officers. You will find most of the relevant decisions on the <a href="http://www.bailii.org/" target="_blank">British and Irish Legal Information Institute ("BAILII") website</a>.<br />
<br /><div>You will find my other tips <a href="https://nipc-branding.blogspot.com/p/auntie-janes-trade-mark-tips.html" target="_blank">indexed here</a>.</div><div><p>If you are an entrepreneur, business owner or anyone else seeking guidance on UK trade mark law, I can give you up to 30 minutes of my time for initial advice and signposting. That may not be enough time to dispose of your issue but it should be enough to define it and assess what further assistance you need, what sort of professional is best placed to supply it and how and where to find such assistance. </p><p><br /></p></div></div>
<iframe height="1446" title="Embedded Wufoo Form" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width:100%;border:none" src="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/embed/zlb7bwf038b7ut/"> <a href="https://nipclaw.wufoo.com/forms/zlb7bwf038b7ut/">Fill out my Wufoo form!</a> </iframe>Jane Lamberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14448574554083999342noreply@blogger.com0