A real protection for fictional trademarks - Истинската закрила на въображаемите марки

Всички знаем как се защитава една търговска марка, съответно как се предотвратява нейното непозволено използване.
В днешни дни обаче връзката между бизнесът и изкуството стана изключително тънка.
От тук възниква един интересен въпрос- Как би могъл да се защити например, като марка един популярен елемент от художествено произведение ( анимационен филм, игрален филм, комикс и тн.).
Големи компании като 20th Century Fox, Marvel и Disney постоянно създават художествени произведения, елементи от които придобиват сериозен пазарен потенциал.
Iposgoode публикува една интересна статия по въпроса касаеща публикацията на Benjamin Arrow “Real-Life Protection for Fictional Trademarks”.
Статията разглежда въпроса как въображаеми марки могат да получат закрила в реалния свят. Дава се интересен пример с една марка бира ‘Duff Beer’, която се продава в Австралия, но нейното име и визия са взети от популярния анимационен сериал The Simpsons притежание на 20th Century Fox.
Основният проблем тук е как да се докажат реално претърпени вреди от нарушаването на марката.
Тъй като 20th Century Fox не произвеждат бира те трудно могат да покажат реалните си загуби от използването на ‘Duff Beer’ от австралийската компания. Доказването на потребителското объркване също е много трудно тъй като на реалния пазар има само една реална бира, другата е в анимационния сериал.
Единственият вариант за защита тук е чрез авторското право относно образните елементи, както и на основа на непозволеното възползване от изградена репутация на сериала The Simpsons.
Повече по тази тема може да откриете тук.
Статията на Benjamin Arrow може да откриете тук.

English version

We all know how to protect a trademark and how to prevent its unauthorized use.
Nowadays, however, the relationship between business and art has become extremely thin.
Here arises an interesting question- How could be defended for example,as a brand a popular element of artwork (cartoon, movies, comics, etc..).
Large companies like 20th Century Fox, Marvel and Disney permanently create works of art, elements of which acquire significant market potential.
Iposgoode published an interesting article on the issue concerning the publication of Benjamin Arrow "Real-Life Protection for Fictional Trademarks".
The article examines how fictional brands can receive protection in the real world. It give an interesting example of one brand of beer 'Duff Beer' which is sold in Australia but her name and image are taken from the popular animated series The Simpsons owned by 20th Century Fox.
The main problem here is how to prove actual damages by the infringement of the mark.
As 20th Century Fox does not produce beer is hard to show their real losses from the use of 'Duff Beer' by the Australian company. A proof of consumer confusion is also very difficult to be shown because in the real market there is only one real beer, the other is in the animated series.
The only option here is to protect through copyright for imaging elements and the basis of unauthorized benefit from the established reputation of the series The Simpsons.
More on this topic can be found here.
The article by Benjamin Arrow can be found here.

A new Law on Industrial Design in Bulgaria - Нов закон за промишления дизайн в България

Освен промените в Закона за търговските марки, от тази година има промени и в Закона за промишленият дизайн в България.
Новата система за регистрация на промишлен дизайн се свежда до следното: експертизното производство по заявката включва проверка дали заявката отговаря на изискванията за формална редовност и дали удовлетворява критериите, залегнали в чл. 3 и чл. 11, ал. 2, т. 1 от закона, а именно дали заявеният обект представлява дизайн по смисъла на закона и дали не противоречи на обществения ред или добрите нрави. Ако заявката за промишлен дизайн отговаря на посочените по-горе условия, се постановява решение за регистрация и дизайнът се публикува в Официалния бюлетин на Ведомството.
Патентно ведомство вече няма да извършва експертиза за наличие на по-ранни дизайни или други права на интелектуална собственост.
Всеки който открие че регистриран дизайн засяга притежавани вече от него права, има възможност да открие процедура по заличаване на съответният дизайн.
Повече информация може да откриете тук.
Промененият закон промишленият дизайн може да откриете тук.
Новата система за регистрация на дизайни копира тази на дизайните на Общността.
Очакваме да разберем как тя ще проработи в условията в България.

English version

Besides changes in the Law on Trademarks, there are changes in the Law on industrial designs in Bulgaria since this year.
The new system of registration of a design is as follows: the expertise of the claimed design includes verifying whether the application meets the requirements for formal regularity and satisfies the criteria laid down in Art. 3 and Art. 11, para. 2, item 1 of the Law, namely whether the requested object is a design under the law and if not contrary to public order or morality. If the design application meets the above conditions, the Office shall issue a decision on registration and design will be publish in the Official Gazette of the Office.
The Patent Office will no longer examine the presence of earlier designs or other intellectual property rights.
Anyone who finds that the registered design affects its rights, can initiate proceedings for the invalidation of the relevant design.
More information can be found here.
The amended law on designs can be found here.
The new system for registration of designs copy the Community design regulation.
We expect to understand how it will works in conditions in Bulgaria.

Some changes in the Trademark Law in Bulgaria came into force - Промените в закон за търговските марки в България влязоха в сила

Промените в Закона за марките и географските означения влязоха в сила считано от 10.03.2011 година.
Промените в закона са радикални тъй като въвеждат нова система за регистрация на търговски марки в страната.
До момента в България важеше така наречената регистрационна система при която Патентно ведомство имаше пълният ангажимент да извърши цялостна експертиза дали една новозаявена марка може да бъде регистрирана или не. Причините поради които съответната марка можеше да получи отказ за регистрация бяха две- абсолютни основания ( според чл.11 от ЗМГО) и относителни основания ( чл.12 от ЗМГО- по ранни права на интелектуална собственост).
До момента Патентно ведомство извършваше експертиза дали заявената марка съответства на изискванията на закона, като в случай че марката не отговаря на абсолютните критерий или е идентична и сходна на по-ранна вече регистрирана марка, ведомството постановяваше отказ.
От 10 март 2011 година, Патентно ведомство ще извършва само експертиза на абсолютни основания но не и експертиза за наличие на по-ранни права на интелуктуална собственост ( регистрирани марки, промишлени дизайни и тн.).
В бъдеще всеки притежател на такива по-ранни права може да ги защите чрез новия механизъм в закона, така наречената опозиция. С една дума всеки трябва да защитава правата си сам, като прояви необходимата инициативност и наблюдателност.

Повече информация за опозиционната система може да откриете тук.
ЗМГО с новите промени може да откриете тук.
Проекта за нови такси относно регистрацията на марки може да откриете тук.

Направените промени в закона се базират на законодателството на ЕС в тази област. Реално системата за защита на марки в България копира тази на защита на марките на Общността.
Тази европейска система обаче изисква сериозна подготовка от страна на притежателите на права, извършване на аналитична и планова дейност относно управлението на интелектуалната собственост и тн.
Основният извод който може да се направи, е че в бъдеще компаниите в България ще трябва да заложат в своята схема на дейност направлението мениджмънт на интелектуалната собственост, както това са направили компаниите на Запад и в САЩ.
В противен случай нематериалните им активи- търговски марки, промишлени дизайни и тн., могат да загубят своята ценност и уникалност, като бъдат използвани от всеки пазарен участник.

English version

Some changes in the Bulgarian Law on Marks and Geographical Indications came into force with effect on 10.03.2011.
This changes are radical because they introduce a new system for trademark registration in the country.
So far Bulgaria has so-called a registration system under which the Patent Office had a full commitment to make a thorough examination of whether a new mark can be registered or not.
The reason for refusing a registration of one trademark were two - absolute grounds (according to Article 11 of the Trademark Law) and relative grounds (Article 12 of the Trademark Law- earlier intellectual property rights).
Until now, the Patent Office examined whether the applied mark is in conformity with the law and if the mark does not meet the absolute criterion or it is identical and similar to earlier already registered mark, the Office denied the registration.
Since March 10, 2011, the Patent Office will only make examination on absolute grounds but will not examine the existence of earlier rights (trade marks, designs and so on.).
In the future, the holders of those earlier rights can protect them through a new mechanism in the law so-called the opposition. In one word, everyone should protect their rights alone as he showed the necessary initiative and vigilance.

More information about the opposition system can be found here.
The Trademark Law with this new changes can be found here.
A draft concerning new charges refer to the registration of marks can be found here.

Those changes in the law were based on EU legislation in this area. The new system of protection of trademarks in Bulgaria copy the system of Community trademarks.
This European system, however, requires serious preparation by rightholders, more analytical and planning work concerning the management of intellectual property and so on.
The main conclusion that can be drawn is that in future companies in Bulgaria will have to set in its scheme of work so called management of intellectual property like companies in West Europe and US.
Otherwise, their intangible assets as trademarks, designs and so on, may lose its value and uniqueness and can be used by any market participant.

A new common database presented by OHIM - eSearch Plus - Нова обща база данни OHIM - eSearch Plus

OHIM създаде нова обща база данни да търговски марки и промишлени дизайни на Общността.
Базата все още е в своята beta версия и може да бъде открита тук.
На пръв поглед прави впечатление сериозната интерактивност на базата данни. Дават се опции за basic и advanced search с възможност за управление на критериите за търсене според личните предпочитания на всеки потребител.
Голям плюс е че на едно място е събрана буквално цялата информация касаещо една марки или дизайн на Общността, тук се включва:
- информация за евентуални опозиции срещу марката;
- основания за подадените опозиции, директна връзка с противопоставените марки;
- информация за решения свързани с опозиции, обжалвания и тн.
- данни за дата и бюлетин на публикуване на марката или дизайна, както и връзка с тях;

Освен горното базата данни предоставя възможност за търсене на решения на OHIM касаещи регистрацията на марки и дизайни- откази, опозиции, заличавания, обжалвания, решения на Европейския съд и тн.
Презентация на начина по който работи новата база данни може да откриете тук.

Като цяло оценката за eSearch Plus е много добра. OHIM по примера на WIPO върви по правилния път, като създава обобщаваща база данни, която да подпомогне още повече всеки професионалист в областта на интелектуалната собственост.

English version

OHIM create a new common database for Community trademarks and designs.
The database is still in its beta version and can be found here.
At first glance the interactivity of the database made a serious impression. It provides options for basic and advanced search with the ability to control the search criteria according to personal preferences of each user.
A big plus is that in one place has gathered all the information concerning one Community mark or design, this includes:
- an information about possible oppositions for the mark;
- grounds for oppositions and a direct link to conflicting marks;
- an information concerning decisions related to the oppositions, appeals and so on.
- details of publications of the mark or design, as well as links with them;

Besides the above this database provides an opportunity to search for decisions of the OHIM concerning registration of trademarks and designs, refusals, oppositions, appeals, rulings of the court and so on.
The presentation of how this new database works can be found here.

The overall assessment of eSearch Plus is a very good. OHIM follow the example of WIPO and go the right way creating a common database to help toeach professional in the field of intellectual property.

Intellectual Property Network has a new name - Intellectual Property Network вече е с ново име

Intellectual Property Network вече е с ново име и визия. Подържаната от г-н Mikk Putk мрежа за споделяне на информация касаеща интелектуалната собственост вече е с името IP INSIDERS и има нова интерактивна визия.
Повече информация може да откриете тук.

English version

Intellectual Property Network has a new name and vision. Sustained by Mr. Mikk Putk network for sharing information concerning intellectual property has already had a following name - IP INSIDERS and a new interactive vision.
More information can be found here.

Ferrari in a dispute with Ford - Ferrari в спор с Форд

Ferrari се отказа да използва самостоятелно името F150 за своя най-нов болид от F1.
Това стана след като Ford Motor Company заведе дело в Детройт срещу италианската компания. Причината е че F150 е много сходно с най-продаваният пикап на Ford F-150.
От Ford считат че по този начин Ferarri искат да се облагодетелстват от репутацията на пикапа им.
В отговор Ferrari посочват, че използват F150 тъй като честват 150 годишнината от основаването на компанията.
Освен това болидът от F1 надали може да бъде сбъркан с пикапът на Ford, така че не е възможно потребителско объркване.
Въпреки това от Ferrari обявяват, че не желаят да спорят повече, поради което в бъдеще ще използват пълното наименование на своя болид Ferrari F150th Italia.

English version

Ferrari has refused to use the name F150 for its newest car of F1.
This happened after the Ford Motor Company had filed suit in Detroit against the Italian company. The reason is that F150 is a very similar to the best-selling Ford's pickup F-150.
By Ford considered that by this way Ferrari want to benefit from the reputation of their truck.
In response Ferrari indicated that the use of F150 is refer to celebrating the 150th anniversary of the company.
Furthermore, the F1 car can hardly be confused with the pickup so it is not possible consumer to be confusion.
However by Ferrari announced that they don't want to argue any more so in the future they will use the full name of their car - Ferrari F150th Italia.

1000 can not be a trademark - 1000 не може да бъде марка

Полската компания Agencja Wydawnicza "TECHNOPOL" Spólka z o.o. подава заявка за европейска марка състояща се от цифрата 1000. Марката е заявена за клас 16 - печатни материали, кръстословици, пъзели и клас 41 -услуги свързани с организиране на игри, публикации и тн.
OHIM отказва да регистрира марката за клас 16 на абсолютни основания, тъй като я счита за описателна относно заявените стоки.
Полската компания обжалва това решение пред CFI. Съдът потвърждава отказът. Това решение е обжалвано отново.
Наскоро Европейският съд излезе с финално решение по този спор.
Според съда цифрата 1000 не може да бъде търговска марка тъй като е описателна за посочените стоки.
Освен това 1000 показва количество, което може да доведе потребителите до заблуждение относно броят на стоките предлагани от компанията.
Реално това решение на съда отхвърля регистрацията на цифра, като марка но при определени обстоятелства описани по-горе.

English version

The Polish company Agencja Wydawnicza "TECHNOPOL" Spólka filed an application for European trademark consisting of the number 1000. The mark is applied for Class 16 - printed materials, crossword puzzles and Class 41 services related to organizing games, publications and so on.
OHIM refused to register the mark for Class 16 on absolute grounds because it considers that mark is descriptive about these goods.
The Polish company appealed that decision to the CFI. The Court upheld the refusal. This decision was appealed again.
Recently, the European Cour hast issued a final decision on this dispute.
According to court the figure 1000 can not be a trademark because it is descriptive to indicated goods.
Furthermore, 1000 shows the quantity that may lead consumers to confusion about the number of goods offered by the company.
Actually this decision of the court has rejected the registration of number as a mark under certain circumstances described above.

The Max Planck Study concerning trademarks in EU - Изследване на системата за закрила на търговски марки в Европа

Изследване озаглавено - the Study on the Overall Functioning of the European Trade Mark System представено от the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law, беше публикувано наскоро на сайта на Европейската комисия.
Документа изследва подробно състоянието на системата за закрила на търговски марки в Европа, нейните предимства и недостатъци.
Изследването може да откриете тук.

English version

A study entitled - the Study on the Overall Functioning of the European Trade Mark System presented by the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law, has recently been published on the website of the European Commission.
The document examines in detail the state of the system of protection of trademarks in Europe, its advantages and disadvantages.
The survey can be found here.

A Bulgarian trademark TCHERGA in Poland - Българска марка Черга в Полша

Marques Class 46 съобщава новината за интересен случай относно регистрацията на марка TCHERGA в Полша.
Компанията DOMAIN MENADA Sp. z o.o. заявява марка TCHERGA – ŻYJ KOLOROWO" за клас 33 в Полша. Патентното ведомство на Полша отказва да регистрира марката поради наличието на по-ранна марка Tcherga регистрирана от BELVEDERE Capital Management.
DOMAIN MENADA посочва че тя е компания, която е свързана с българската компания BELVEDERE и че има писмо за съгласие относно регистрацията на марката. Освен това те припомнят, че вече имат една регистрирана марка по този начин - TCHERGA CRAZY FOR COLOUR.
Патентното ведомство потвърждава отказът тъй като според полското законодателство свързаността на компаниите не е основание за допускане на регистрация на идентични или сходни марки за идентични или сходни класове.
Писмото за съгласие като опция се допуска в силно ограничени случай на регистрация на идентични марки за идентични стоки, като обаче по-ранната марка се прекратява.
С една дума не се допуска две компании да притежават еднакви марки.
Посочената от DOMAIN MENADA регистрация на марка с писмо за съгласие е станала преди Върховният съд да се произнесе, че тази практика е неправилна съобразно полското законодателство.
Всеки който иска да защити своята марка в Полша трябва да има предвид горното.

English version

Marques Class 46 reported news of an interesting case concerning the registration of a mark TCHERGA in Poland.
DOMAIN MENADA Sp. z oo filed application for trademark TCHERGA - ŻYJ KOLOROWO "for Class 33 in Poland.
Poland's Patent Office refused to register the mark because of the existence of an earlier mark Tcherga registered by BELVEDERE Capital Management.
DOMAIN MENADA indicate that it is a company that is associated with the Bulgarian company BELVEDERE and that there is a letter of consent on the registration of that mark. Furthermore, they recall that they have already had a registered trade mark - TCHERGA CRAZY FOR COLOUR by this way.
The Patent Office confirmed the refusal because according to Polish law the connectivity of the companies is not a reason for allowing the registration of identical or similar marks for identical or similar classes.
The letter of consent as an option is allowed in very limited cases of registration of identical marks for identical goods, however, the earlier mark is terminated.
In one word it is not allow two companies to own same trademarks.
The mark which has already been registered with a letter of consent occurred before the Supreme Court to rule that this practice is improper under Polish law.
Anyone who wants to protect its brand in Poland should consider the above.

UKIPO publishes updated guidance for expertise concerning trademarks - UKIPO публикува обновено ръководство за експертиза касаещо марки

Патентното ведомство на Великобритания публикува обновената версия на Ръководството за за експертиза на търговски марки в процеса на тяхната регистрация. То е валидно от 28 февруари 2011 година.
Ръководството може да откриете тук.

English version

UK Patent Office published a revised version of the Guide for examination of trademarks in the process of their registration. It is valid from February 28, 2011.
The guide can be found here.

Upcoming events organized by WIPO in 2011 - Предстоящи събития организирани от WIPO през 2011

WIPO публикува информация за предстоящи събития организирани от тях през 2011 година. Списъкът е следния:

SIXTH GLOBAL CONGRESS ON COMBATING COUNTERFEITING AND PIRACY

Sixth Global Congress on Combating Counterfeiting and Piracy under the High Patronage of President Sarkozy: the sixth cycle of the Global Congress under the theme Building Respect for IP: Sustainable Solutions to a Global Problem, held at the Cité des Sciences et de l'Industrie in Paris, France on February 2-3, 2011, was hosted by France’s Industrial Property Office (INPI) and chaired by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

For more information, please visit the Congress website.

Sixth Session of the Advisory Committee on Enforcement (ACE)

The sixth session of the Advisory Committee on Enforcement (ACE) was held in Geneva on December 1-2, 2010. In the course of the two days, the Committee heard presentations by seven speakers relating to the work program agreed upon at the fifth session of the ACE. The presentations were followed by discussions during which a number of observations were made and questions were raised. Member States made several proposals on the future work of the ACE. The Committee agreed upon a continuation of the work program of the sixth session of the ACE.

For further information, please consult: http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meeting_id=20199

II. COOPERATION WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND NON–GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

COOPERATION WITH THE WORLD CUSTOMS ORGANIZATION (WCO): COUNTERFEITING & PIRACY GROUP (CAP)

Continuing its cooperation with the WCO WIPO participated in the third meeting of the WCO Counterfeiting and Piracy Group (CAP) on November 2 and 3, 2010. The meeting focused on capacity building and international cooperation in combating counterfeiting and piracy. As Chair of the 6^th Global Congress on Combating Counterfeiting and Piracy co-organized in partnership with the WCO and INTERPOL, WIPO made a presentation on the objectives for the next Congress. For additional information, please consult: http://www.wcoomd.org/home_cboverviewboxes_valelearningoncustomsvaluation_epipr.htm

COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE (UNECE): INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE COMMERCIALIZATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF IP

WIPO has continued its cooperation with UNECE by participating in the International Conference on the Commercialization and Enforcement of IP, organized by UNECE in cooperation with the All-Russian Association of Small and Medium-Seized Enterprises, the Federal Service for IP, Patents and Trademarks (ROSPATENT) and the USPTO,. and held in Moscow from October 6 to 8, 2010. For more information, please consult: http://www.unece.org/ceci/documents/2010/ip/programme_conf.8.pdf

COOPERATION WITH INTERPOL

In the framework of its cooperation with INTERPOL, WIPO participated in the International Law Enforcement IP Crime Conference in Hong Kong, from October 19 to 21, 2010. The Conference provided an opportunity to share experiences and useful information in the enforcement of IP rights as well as to reflect WIPO’s Strategic Goal VI International Cooperation on Building Respect for IP. More information is available at: http://www.interpol.int/Public/ICPO/PressReleases/PR2010/News20101026.asp

UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME (UNODC)

WIPO participated as observer in the fourth meeting of the Open-ended Intergovernmental Working group on Asset Recovery held in Vienna, Austria, from December 16 to December 17, 2010. The group held thematic discussions on aspects such as working towards a global network on asset recovery, financial investigations and asset-tracing. The asset recovery has been a recurring issue in the scope of the activities of WIPO’s Program 17. For more information, please consult: http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/working-group2.html

LEGAL IQ BRAND PROTECTION MEETING

On November 18 and 19, 2010, WIPO participated in the Conference on Brand Protection and Anti-Counterfeiting held in Amsterdam, Netherlands. The Conference was an opportunity to share experiences and discuss relevant issues related to the enforcement of IP rights inter alia online infringements, intermediary liability, and goods in transit. WIPO used the occasion to draw the attention of the audience to Strategic Goal VI International Cooperation on Building Respect for IP. More information is available at: http://www.iqpc.com/Event.aspx?id=345234

Chatham House: Roundtable on counterfeit, falsified and substandard medicines

On December 16, 2010, WIPO participated in a Roundtable on Counterfeit, Falsified and Substandard Medicines hosted by the Centre on Global Health Security at the Chatham House. In the course of the meeting, current definitions and legal provisions related to counterfeit, falsified and substandard medicines at national and at international levels were reviewed and proposals for revising current definitions were discussed. Further information is available at: http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/events/view/-/id/1723/

III. LINKS

ANTI-COUNTERFEITING TRADE AGREEMENT (ACTA) NEGOTIATIONS:

The negotiating parties of the ACTA released a text dated on December 3, 2010. Various negotiating parties have made the text available; inter alia the Swiss IP Office at: https://www.ige.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/Juristische_Infos/e/acta_final_text.pdf;

the European Union at: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/december/tradoc_147079.pdf

CHINA: NEW CAMPAIGN AGAINST IPR VIOLATIONS

The State Council announced the decision to launch a broad campaign targeting the production and distribution of pirate products such as software and DVDs and counterfeit products, including the sales of infringing products over the Internet. The campaign is also intended to enhance China’s scrutiny over the import and export of IPR infringing goods. More information can be found at:

http://www.chinaipr.gov.cn/newsarticle/news/government/201010/974226_1.html

CHINA: DIRECTOR OF SIPO MET WITH U.S. IPR ENFORCEMENT COORDINATOR

On October 21, 2010, the Director of the State Intellectual Property Office of China (SIPO) met with the U.S. IPR Enforcement Coordinator Victoria A. Espinel. Officials from U.S. Department of State, United States Embassy in China and IPR Commissioners also attended the meeting. During the meeting, the Head of SIPO indicated that China has established an Inter-Ministerial Joint Conference for the implementation of a National IPR Strategy focusing on IPR protection. Further information is available at:

http://www.chinaipr.gov.cn/newsarticle/news/chinaworld/201010/975058_1.html

EUROPEAN COMMISSION: CONSULTATION ON THE COMMISSION REPORT ON THE ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

The European Commission released a report on the enforcement of intellectual property rights that provides a first assessment of the implementation and impact of Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights. European Institutions, Member States and private stakeholders are welcome to submit contributions to the report until March 31, 2011. The consultation is particularly aimed at verifying the information provided in the report as well as identifying additional issues to be addressed in the context of a possible review of the Directive. Further information is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/iprenforcement/directives_en.htm

EUROPEAN COMMISSION: REVIEW OF CUSTOMS LEGISLATION ON ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

The European Commission has – in close collaboration with the Member States – carried out a review of the Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003 concerning customs action against goods suspected of infringing certain intellectual property rights and the measures to be taken against goods found to have infringed such rights. Public consultation was open until June 7, 2010. Should the European Commission consider it appropriate in light of this review and the public consultation, it will prepare a proposal for a Regulation of the Council and of the European Parliament, concerning customs enforcement of intellectual property rights that replaces Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003. For more information, please consult:

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/common/consultations/customs/ipr_2010_03_en.htm

EUROPEAN COMMISSION: STUDY ON RAPID INFORMATION EXCHANGE ON COUNTERFEITING AND PIRACY

On August, 2010, the European Commission released the Study on Rapid Information Exchange on Counterfeiting and Piracy, aimed to provide an up-to-date inventory to assess existing and planned e-government initiatives at national and European levels, and to assess needs for cooperation and information sharing on counterfeiting and piracy between different administrative and operational enforcement agencies in Europe. The study is available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/iprenforcement/docs/study_information_en.pdf

EUROPEAN COMMISSION: SURVEY ON IPR PROTECTION AND ENFORCEMENT IN THIRD COUNTRIES

Following a similar survey done in 2006 and 2008, the European Commission launched a survey on the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights in third countries. The survey is linked to the Strategy for the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) in Third Countries adopted by the Commission in 2004. Further information is available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/creating-opportunities/trade-topics/intellectual-property/enforcement/

FRANCE: GUIDE AGAINST COUNTERFEITING

As a part of the joint public-private initiatives to provide information and to raise awareness among consumers and entrepreneurs pertaining to the problems posed by counterfeit products; the National Committee against Counterfeiting (Comité National Anti-Contrefacon) makes available a practical guide intended to orient entrepreneurs on protective measures against counterfeiting, providing practical information based on concrete cases. The guide is available at:

http://www.contrefacon-danger.com/ressources/pdf/guide_Contrefacon_2010.pdf

MEXICO: CAMPAIGN AMONG CHILDREN AGAINST PIRACY

On September 20, 2010, the Mexican Industrial Property Office (IMPI), launched the fourth edition of the drawing competition entitled “Children against Piracy”, aiming at building respect for intellectual property among children. Each participant will receive a credential as “youth inspector against piracy”; the awards for the winners will be given in the framework of the Intellectual Property Day on April 26, 2011. For more information (in Spanish) please consult:

http://www.impi.gob.mx/wb/IMPI/4_concurso_de_dibujo_infantil_por_el_respeto_a_las

PERU: CAMPAIGN AGAINST PIRACY

The Intellectual Property Office of Peru (INDECOPI) encourages to support a campaign against piracy to protect national authors, including the 2011 Literature Nobel Prize, Mario Vargas Llosa. Currently, INDECOPI is coordinating actions with various enforcement agencies, including prosecutors and police corps to combat copyright crimes. A communication (in Spanish) from INDECOPI is available at:

http://www.indecopi.gob.pe/0/modulos/NOT/NOT_DetallarNoticia.aspx?PFL=0&NOT=234

SWITZERLAND: LAUNCH OF A NEW CAMPAIGN AGAINST COUNTERFEITING AND PIRACY

On October 28, 2010, the public-private partnership ‘STOP PIRACY’ launched its “Piracy is cruel” campaign, marking the ‘STOP PIRACY DAY 2010.’ The new campaign aims to provide detailed information on the destructive effects of fake products. It will be displayed in cinemas, on TV, on the Internet, on billboards and in press adverts. The media release is available at:

http://www.stop-piracy.ch/en/news/documents/20101028/Medienmitteilung_SPD_2010_E_10-10-27.pdf

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL: Release of report “Media Piracy in Emerging Economies”

The Social Science Research Council (SSRC) has recently released its report “Media Piracy in Emerging Economies”. It is the first independent large-scale study of music, film and software piracy in emerging economies, focusing on Brazil, India, Russia, South Africa, Mexico and Bolivia. Print and other versions of the report are available at: http://piracy.ssrc.org

WCO: New IPR tool to combat counterfeiting and Piracy

In June 2010, the World Customs Organization (WCO) launched a new tool to combat counterfeiting and piracy, known as Interface Public-Members (IPM). IPM consists of an online database enabling Rights Holders to provide Customs field officers with real-time data on their products as well as information making it possible to distinguish between “genuine” and “fake” goods. Customs field officers can access this information and training tool, free of charge, anywhere in the world via simple and secure user interfaces in their own language. Further information is available at: http://ipmpromo.wcoomdpublications.org

WHO Working Group on “Substandard/Spurious/Falsely-Labelled/ Falsified/Counterfeit” medical products

The newly designated Working Group on Substandard/Spurious/Falsely-Labelled/Falsified/Counterfeit Medical Products met in Geneva from February 28 to March 2, 2011 in order to make specific recommendations to the 64^th World Health Assembly (WHA), from May 16-24, 2011. For further information, please consult: http://apps.who.int/gb/ssffc/

CHIVAS losses dispute concerning a mark contains the word CHIVALRY - CHIVAS загуби спор относно марка съдържаща думата CHIVALRY

Chivas Holdings Limited подава заявка за следната европейска марка CHIVAS LIVE WITH CHIVALRY за клас 33.
The Glencairn Scotch whisky Company Limited подава опозиция срещу тази марка на основата на две свой марки, регистрирани също за клас 33.


OHIM излиза с решение, че поради идентичността на стоките и сходството на марките поради наличието и в трите на водещия елемент CHIVALRY, опозицията трябва да бъде уважена.
Chivas обжалват това решение.
Според решението на Апелативния борд на OHIM опозицията трябва да бъде потвърдена.
При сравнение на посочените марки основният ясно открояващ се елемент е думата CHIVALRY, която има собствен смисъл.
Марката на Chivas представлява рекламен слоган поради, което потребителите биха възприели тази марка, като рекламираща продуктите на The Glencairn Scotch whisky Company.
Макар да се приема, че при сравнение на марки водеща е първата им част, то това не винаги е така. В конкретния случай ясно открояващият и доминиращ елемент в марките е CHIVALRY.
Въпреки наличието на думата CHIVAS в заявената марка, която има други регистрации, поради наличието на елемента CHIVALRY потребителите биха помислили, че между двете компании има връзка.
информация на Marques Class 46.

English version

Chivas Holdings Limited filed an application for the following European trademark- CHIVAS LIVE WITH CHIVALRY for class 33.
The Glencairn Scotch whisky Company Limited filed opposition against this mark on its two marks also registered in Class 33.

OHIM issued a decision that because of the identity of the goods and the similarity of the marks with a view of the element CHIVALRY, the opposition must be upheld.
Chivas appealed that decision.
According to the decision of the Appeal Board opposition should to be confirmed.
The comparison of these marks clearly distinguished main element - the word CHIVALRY which has its own meaning.
The mark of Chivas represent an advertising slogan because of which consumers would perceive it as promoting the products of The Glencairn Scotch whisky Company.
In the case at issue, the dominant element of the earlier trademark is the word CHIVALRY and, even if located at the end of the trademark, CHILVARLY is also the element which will be remembered within the global image of the opposed trademark.
Even if “Chivas” would be recognized as being a trademark in the contested sign (in respect to alcoholic beverages, and in particular in respect of whiskies and malts, the relevant consumer tends to be particularly brand conscious and brand loyal), consumers acquainted with the earlier trademark, would think that there is an economic link between the undertakings producing the two signs”.
information Marques Class 46.

Birth of The Google Art Project - Раждането на The Google Art Project

Google е една от най-динамично развиващите се компании в света. Това развитие тя дължи безспорно и на постоянното си желание за навлизане в все по нови и нови области.
Преди няколко години Google стартира гигантският си проект Google books, компанията придоби и You tube, като има проект за създаването на Google TV.
Сега Google представи своят най-нов проект- The Google Art Project. Той представлява място където ще се съхраняват изображения на различни произведения на художественото изкуство. До момента са качени няколко хиляди, работата продължава.
От гледна точка на интелектуалната собственост е интересно дали и тук ще възникнат правни спорове, както например при проекта Google books. Тепърва предстой да разберем.

English version

Google is one of the fastest growing companies in the world. She attributed it's development to the continued desire to enter into new and new areas.
A few years ago Google launched its Project Google books and later the company acquired You tube. There is a project for a Google TV.
Now Google introduced its latest project-The Google Art Project. It is a place where images on different works of art will be stored. So far, several thousand have been uploaded, the work continues.
From the intellectual property perspective it is interesting whether there will legal disputes such as these concerning the project Google books.