Refine your search

Content type
Tags
Firm name
Author
Jurisdiction
Language

1,868 results found

Commentary
Ask Lexy

Grau & Angulo | Spain | 8 Nov 2021

Supreme Court rejects consumer error theory

The so-called "consumer error theory" was a jurisprudential trend that held that for a crime to be committed it was necessary for the characteristics of the illicit products to sufficiently mislead the potential purchaser as to their authenticity. In a recent case, the Supreme Court stated that consumer error is not a requirement for a crime. This ruling will certainly have a huge impact on......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Westerberg & Partners Advokatbyrå Ab | Sweden | 1 Nov 2021

No likelihood of confusion between LEGALROOM and LEGALZOOM

In a recent judgment, the Patent and Market Court of Appeal emphasised the conceptual differences between the trademarks LEGALROOM and LEGALZOOM. The Court considered the relevant Swedish public to have good knowledge of English and therefore to be capable of grasping the different meanings of "room" and "zoom". The Court concluded that the visual and phonetic similarities between the......
Article
Ask Lexy

Arent Fox LLP | USA | 15 Apr 2019

Packaging Alert: Do Your Research To Avoid Looking Like A Dum Dums

This case shows the risks of imitating a market leader’s packaging, even if it appears to be common place, without market research and careful…
Article
Ask Lexy

Hogan Lovells | USA | 12 Apr 2019

The Curse of Shoeless Joe Continues: TTAB Finds White Sox Fan Lacked Bona Fide Intent-To-Use

For any baseball fans already preparing to capitalize when their favorite team wins their next World Series game, you may strike out before getting up…
Article
Ask Lexy

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP | USA | 2 Apr 2019

Federal Circuit to TTAB: Consider All Dupont Factors in Likelihood of Confusion Analysis

The Federal Circuit recently reminded the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board that when analyzing whether a likelihood of confusion exists between two…
Article
Ask Lexy

Mirandah Asia | Singapore | 21 Mar 2019

Apple Secures IWATCH Trademark Registration in Singapore

On 24 January 2019, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore ("IPOS") delivered its written judgement dismissing an opposition filed by Swatch AG…
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.
Previous page 1 2 3 ...