We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 16,401

The Importance of Opposing Trademark Applications in Bahrain
  • Al Tamimi & Company - Advocates and Legal Consultants
  • Bahrain
  • August 24 2016

Opposing a trademark application is one of the most important and effective actions that can be taken to prevent the registration of an identical or


Trademark Ownership Structure in the UAE
  • Al Tamimi & Company - Advocates and Legal Consultants
  • United Arab Emirates
  • August 24 2016

Trademarks are exceptionally important and valuable perpetual assets and should always be treated as such. But who should be the owner of the


The goose is cooked: authorised use and bare trade mark licences under Australian law
  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • Australia
  • August 23 2016

Following the recent case of Lodestar Anstalt v Campari America LLC 2016 FCAFC 92, trade mark owners who don’t exercise actual control over


Wexford Blackcurrant Growers Seek European Protection
  • William Fry
  • European Union, Ireland
  • August 23 2016

On foot of a recent national consultation involving interested stakeholders, the Department of Agriculture is reviewing a proposed application to the


IPOPHIL Revises the Rules and Regulations on Inter Partes Proceedings
  • Federis & Associates
  • Philippines
  • August 22 2016

On July 11, 2016, the Director General of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHIL) signed IPOPHIL Memorandum Circular No. 16-007


Once I Obtain My New Jersey Trademark, What Do I Do?
  • CoffyLaw
  • USA
  • August 22 2016

Once you obtain your trademark, you should use your trademark in conjunction with the R in the circle that identifies your mark as being registered


TTAB Test: Which of These Three Section 2(d) Refusals Was Reversed?
  • Wolf Greenfield & Sacks PC
  • USA
  • August 22 2016

People are saying that one can predict the outcome of a Section 2(d) case about 95 percent of the time just by looking at the marks and the


Demystifying brand clearance
  • RNA, Intellectual Property Attorneys
  • India
  • August 22 2016

When selecting a brand there are generally divergent views held by marketing and legal departments of a company. While marketing would like to adopt


Bureau of Legal Affairs sheds light on confusing similarity
  • Romulo Mabanta Buenaventura Sayoc & De Los Angeles
  • Philippines
  • August 22 2016

San Miguel Brewery Inc and Iconic Beverages Inc, both subsidiaries of San Miguel Corporation, filed an opposition against a trademark application by


Marco v. Polo: Navigating Around “Likelihood of Confusion” Refusals
  • Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
  • USA
  • August 22 2016

There are refusals, and then there are refusals, and a "likelihood of confusion" refusal (also called a "Section 2(d)" refusal in the US) is