US Patent and Trademark Office refuses registration of flavour trade mark

In a case of first impression, the Trademark Trial and AppealBoard of the US Patent and Trademark Office has held that theflavour orange is not registrable for use with quick-dissolvingantidepressant tablets and pills.     

Whose trade mark rights? What the Microsoft case means for trade mark owners

Legal context. The article considers the influence of the commissionruling in the Microsoft case, forcing Microsoft to use its WINDOWS-trademark for an ‘unbundled’ version of the program inthe light of the trade mark owner's properties rights. The scopeof these rights is determined by the function of the trade markand the rights that the trade mark laws confer to the ownerin case of infringement. Key points. Trade marks are protected as property rights undercommunity law. They are the embodiment of past investments andtransform the reputation of the owner into a bankable asset.Consumers rely on trade mark owners' control over quality. Thisis mirrored by the rights of the trade mark owner to stop interferencewith quality and image, in particular in the context of resaleof altered products. Any interference that would be considereda trade mark infringement if committed by a private party shouldbe considered an interference with the protected property rightif caused by a government agency. This interference is not justifiedby the public interest because trade mark rights also embodyimportant public interests. Practical significance. If the analysis proposed in the articleis followed, intellectual property rights have to be given greaterweight in shaping antitrust remedies.     

The right venue for trade mark infringement cases

Actions regarding trade mark infringements must be brought beforethe Maritime and Commercial Court and not before any other localcourt in Denmark.     

商标权与商号权的权利冲突及解决途径

作为商业识别标记，商标与商号不仅用以区别商事主体和商品来源，而且还承载商事主体享有的商业信誉、商品的质量承诺。商标与商号本身具有的宣传和促销功能在激烈的市场竞争中所发挥的效用更是不可低估。随着市场经济发展和竞争加剧，企业为了争夺市场、扩大影响导致了商标权与商号权的权利冲突不断发生且有加剧之势。因此，如何完善商标、商号立法及相互间的协调，寻求商标权与商号权权利冲突……     

Navigating the rocky waters of trade mark law

Kerly's Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names, 14th Edition ByDavid Kitchin QC, David Llewelyn, James Mellor, Richard Meade,Tom Moody-Stuart, David Keeling; with Consultant Editor: TheRt. Hon Sir Robin Jacob; Sweet & Maxwell, 2005 Price: £255,Hardback, ISBN: 0421860804, pp. 1,350   Until recently, trade mark practitioners in the United Kingdomhad to make do with the 13th edition of Kerly, the 1st editionof The Modern Law of Trade Marks, or the CIPA/ITMA Handbookwhen navigating the rocky waters of trade mark law and practice.The first two of these texts     

Intellectual Property High Court of Japan denies registration of trade mark for market leading multi-million dollar beer product on non-distinctive grounds

The Intellectual Property High Court of Japan's (IPHCJ) recent Honnama trade mark decisionillustrates the difficulties of registering an inherently non-distinctivemark and the perils of relying on secondary meaning evidenceof use that is not identical with the mark in the trade markapplication.     

Bubbles! The indispensability of the Comparative Advertising Directive to trade mark law

The use by H3G of bubbles in a television advertisement comparingmobile telephone prices complied with the Comparative AdvertisingDirective and thus did not infringe O2's trade mark registrationsfor bubbles. Supplementary data in the form of a clip of theadvertisement discussed in this article is available at www.jiplp.oxfordjournals.org.     

Weighing the parody factor in a trade mark infringement and dilution case

On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court'sdecision that Haute Diggity Dog's (HDD) parody pet toys of famousbrands was not likely to cause confusion with those of LouisVuitton Malletier's (LVM) products. LVM's copyright, trade markdilution, and other claims were also rejected.     

Comparative advertising and trade mark infringement: some guidance from the Netherlands

A recent decision of one of the five Dutch Appeal Courts hasclarified the relationship between trade mark law and advertisinglaw, holding that a trade mark owner cannot successfully accumulatetrade mark and advertising claims: where publicity complieswith the standards of advertising law, such use cannot thusamount to trade mark infringement.     

Winning the infringement war but losing the battle for damages--a case study for trade mark litigants

The Federal Court of Australia has awarded nominal damages onlyto five major American film studios which commenced proceedingsfor, and succeeded in establishing, infringement of their trademarks.     

Should the UK adopt a European system for the registration of trade marks?

An examination of whether the UK Trade Marks Registry shouldno longer undertake searches for relative grounds of refusal.     

Significant 2007 case law on the Community trade mark from the ECJ and the CFI

Legal context: This article looks at the important decisions of 2007 on theCommunity trade mark made by the Luxembourg courts. Key points: The cases discussed concern the application of Council Regulation(EC) No. 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark(the ‘CTMR’), Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2868/95of 13 December 1995 implementing the CTMR (the ‘CTMIR’),and the Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 (‘Directive89/104’). Practical significance: The purpose of this article is to give a quick overview of themost significant trade mark cases decided in 2007 by the Luxembourgcourts. The article has a practical bias and is aimed at readerswho wish to find quickly the key decisions of 2007.     

论债权登记程序在海事赔偿责任限制中的适用

结合《中华人民共和国海事诉讼特别程序法》相关规定和海事诉讼司法实践,分析探讨了现有法律在保障海事赔偿责任限制权利实现方面的局限性,指出了债权登记程序的重要性,提出了相应的立法修改建议.     

WTO对区域贸易协定的规制及其完善

作为一项重要的贸易政策工具,区域贸易协定在上世纪80年代后得到了迅猛发展,给世界经济带来了深远的影响,从而引起了各界对区域贸易协定与多边贸易机制两者间关系的广泛关注.为了保证其在多边框架下的健康发展,GATT/WTO制定了相关的法律规则,以规范、引导此类协定的签订.但由于受技术因素与政治因素的影响,WTO的相关规则未能发挥其应有的作用.为了能发挥更有效的规制作用,世贸组织应制定一项专门规范区域贸易协定的多边协议.     

The irresistible force of freedom of speech meets the immovable object: trade mark law in South Africa

Legal context. The right of freedom of expression is a fundamentalright entrenched in the Bill of Rights incorporated in the SouthAfrican Constitution. While intellectual property rights donot enjoy this status, they are internationally recognised rightsgranted by a law of general application and may thus in termsof the Constitution limit the fundamental rights protected inthe Bill of Rights, and more particularly the right of freedomof expression. Where the enforcement of trade mark rights comes into conflictwith the right of freedom of expression, the two rights mustbe weighed up against one another and the competing interestsof the owner of the trade mark against the claim of expressionof a user without permission must be considered. The departurepoint of the weighing up process is that neither right is superiorto the other. Key points. This article discusses an action brought by SabmarkInternational, which claimed that Laugh It Off Promotions CCinfringed its registered trade mark BLACK LABEL in respect ofbeer by using a corruption of this mark with strong politicalundertones as ornamentation on T-shirts sold by it. It was claimedthat the offending use diluted Sabmark's registered trade mark.In an appeal, the Constitutional Court rejected the claim onthe basis that Sabmark had not shown that the offending usewas likely to cause economic damage to it. Practical significance. The case in effect equated trade markrights with rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights and thusgave important recognition to intellectual property rights.It created a precedent in intellectual property law, if notin South African law in general, in that the constitutionalcourt overruled a decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA)and in effect ruled that the SCA had not interpreted the relevantprovision of the Trade Marks Act correctly.     

世界贸易组织争端解决程序中上诉审的作用

世贸组织争端解决机制中新设了上诉审程序.常设上诉机构的职责是维持、修改或推翻一审中专家小组所作的法律裁决和结论.在数年的实践中,上诉审发挥了积极的作用:较好地协调国际贸易与其它世界性事务的关系;广开言路,增加争端解决机制的透明度;力图在争端解决中全面准确地适用法律规则.与此同时,亦暴露出一些不足,需随着实践的发展加以完善.     

Keywords,case law and the Court of Justice: the need for legislative intervention in modernising European trade mark law

Recent preliminary references to the CJEU on online keyword advertising and registered trade mark infringement have exposed the challenges facing EU registered trade mark law in its response to new technologies. These cases and the challenges they pose provide a timely prism through which to examine the European trade mark law-making process and the role of the CJEU within that process. This article will employ an analysis of the way in which the CJEU has developed certain key new aspects of the law on ‘infringing use’ to explore concerns over the CJEU's role and approach. It will be argued that, driven by policy considerations, the CJEU has acted creatively to develop the law of infringement in ways that cannot be sustained by the TMD and CTMR and which are likely to cause increasing uncertainties going forward. With the European Commission currently considering reform of Trade Marks Directive 2008/95/EC and Community Trade Mark Regulation 207/2009/EC, this paper will argue that there is a need for more comprehensive and forward-looking legislative intervention than has yet been proposed and that such intervention will be essential to restoring balance in the European trade mark law-making process.