Clear all

Refine your search

Tags

65 results found

Commentary
Ask Lexy

Smart & Biggar | Canada | 4 Mar 2019

2018 round-up: notable trademark case law

A number of trademark cases were heard by the Canadian courts in 2018, including a decision on a motion for summary judgment brought by Duracell, a decision on whether Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited's trademarks were confusing in light of new survey evidence filed on appeal and a decision on whether retail store services require a brick-and-mortar establishment or direct delivery of products......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Danubia Patent and Law Office LLC | Hungary | 4 Mar 2019

Facebook secures finding of likelihood of confusion by association

In a recent trademark dispute between Facebook and the owner of the applied-for mark 'mbook – ablak a világra' (ie, 'window to the world'), the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office, the Metropolitan Tribunal and the Metropolitan Court of Appeal came to the same decision on the merits and rejected the applied-for mark, albeit for different reasons. This result is logical, as the Facebook......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

AKD | Netherlands | 18 Feb 2019

Hema crocodile takes bite out of Lacoste trademark

The Hague District Court recently issued a preliminary ruling in which it held that Lacoste could not invoke its famous crocodile trademark in order to prohibit the use of a crocodile motif on children's underwear. This preliminary judgment is one of only a few examples in which the use of a sign has been considered purely decorative (and thus could not be perceived as trademark use)....
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Nater Dallafior Rechtsanwälte | Switzerland | 21 Jan 2019

Federal courts opine on disputed family names

The Federal Supreme Court and the Federal Administrative Court recently handed down conflicting decisions in two ostensibly similar cases concerning disputed family names. The cases demonstrate that while the use of family names in company names is permissible even if the family name is part of an older name of a company active in the same industry, no equivalent rule exists in trademark law.
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Vellani & Vellani | Pakistan | 4 Oct 2018

Show cause notice issued for deceptive marketing practices

Pursuant to a complaint filed by Ferozsons Laboratories Limited, the Competition Commission recently started an enquiry into Neucon Pakistan for deceptive marketing practices under the Competition Act. The respondent's behaviour was judged to have been capable of deceiving consumers, which could in turn damage the complainant's business interests. In the interest of the general public, it was......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Lee and Li Attorneys at Law | Taiwan | 17 Sep 2018

Non-traditional trademarks: IP Court clarifies requirements for determining criminal liability

Under Article 97 of the Trademark Act, maliciously selling and importing counterfeits is subject to criminal liability. However, defendants are liable only if they act with malicious intent to sell and import counterfeits – where no malicious intent is proved or where it is shown that the defendant simply acted recklessly, they will not be held liable. A recent IP Court decision has clarified......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Wanhuida Intellectual Property | China | 16 Jul 2018

Relationship between new Anti-unfair Competition Law and Paris Convention: misleading consumers

The legislature had been planning the recent amendments to the Anti-unfair Competition Law since China's accession to the World Trade Organisation. Although most of the main concepts and principles of the original 1993 text have been maintained, during the act's revision, Article 6 – which concerns misleading consumers and acts of confusion – was one of the most discussed provisions.
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Vellani & Vellani | Pakistan | 28 May 2018

Protecting unregistered trademark rights from passing off

In a recent case, the appellant challenged the Additional District Court's decision to dismiss a permanent injunction issued against the respondent for its adoption of a mark that was confusingly similar to that of the appellant. The decision reflects that unregistered trademark rights can be protected through a passing-off claim where it can be established that the trademark has gained......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

KISCH IP | South Africa | 7 May 2018

When is a descriptive mark not a descriptive mark?

In a recent appeal against a decision to uphold an opposition against the registration of the trademark PEPPAMATES in view of the registered trademark PEPPADEW, the Supreme Court of Appeal had to consider when a descriptive mark is not a descriptive mark. The Supreme Court of Appeal's judgment has confirmed that where the prefix or first element of a word is in common use, the suffix or last......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Danubia Patent and Law Office LLC | Hungary | 23 Apr 2018

Significance of use in opposition proceedings

Case law clearly demonstrates that opponents in opposition and cancellation procedures must often prove the genuine use of their mark. However, whether online publicity constitutes acceptable proof of use has been the subject of debate. In a recent case, the Metropolitan Tribunal expressly recognised the role of the Internet in commerce and imposed a higher standard of use – namely, evidence......
Previous page 1 2 3 ...