Donald Trump registered a trademark in China

largeuschina

WIPR reports about the fact that the new elected US President Donald Trump received a trademark registration regarding his name in China. According to this information he possesses another 49 pending trademark applications in the country.

Some lawyers in US  (The Independent и The Washington Post.), however, consider that this could create a problem with the US Constitution which bars civil servants from accepting anything of value from foreign countries without the consent of Congress.

Apart from this the case is interesting in light of the recent successful trademark battle over Michael Jordan name in China which was ended after many years fighting with a local company.

More information here.

 

Companies are concerned about the role of intellectual property

intellectual-propertyThe Telegraph published an interesting article on various worries expressed by some of the most innovative companies in the world such as BAE Systems, Siemens, Philips and Bayer regarding the role of intellectual property in the contemporary business world.

Intellectual property management as part of the entire business management is not always on the necessary level. Many problems are cited, for example a lack of clear valuation of intellectual property which in turn reflects on unclear knowledge about the real company’s market value. In addition, there is a problem with the information on intellectual property protection  which is a threat to the innovation process as a whole. Some companies are concerned about the IP risks which go hand in hand with innovations and how to overcome them so as to escape any lawsuits for instance.

More information can be found here.

Brief IP news

briefs_1131. A Weak Patent System Increases Inequality, Protects Incumbent Monopolies. More information here.

2. Is 100 PERCENT WINE Confusable with CENTO PER CENTO for Wine? More information here.

3. Changes to the IP Landscape in Turkey-Industrial Designs. More information here.

Information from Intellectual Property Center at the UNWE. More information can be found here

Cambodia will accept European patents

flag_of_cambodia-svg

The European Patent Office announced an agreement with Cambodia according to which European patents will be valid on its territory. Cambodia becomes the first Asian country which acknowledge the validity of European patents. The agreement will enter into force on 01.07.2017.

In this way applicants of such patents will be able to seek protection on the territory of 43 European or Non-European countries.

The main reason for Cambodia to accept EU patent is the opportunity to boost an interest from European companies to make a business in the country.

More information here.

 

A clash of Scottish clans – a General court decision

whiskeyMarques Class 46 reports about an interesting decision of the General court of the EU regarding Case T-250/15, Speciality Drinks Ltd v EUIPO. Briefly this case concerns an attempt for registration of an European word trademark CLAN for Class 33 ‘Alcoholic beverages ( excluding beers and wines); but insofar as whisky and whisky based liqueurs are concerned only Scotch whisky and Scotch whisky based liqueurs produced in Scotland’.

Against this mark an opposition was filed on the ground of an earlier trademark CLAN MACGREGOR for the same goods.

According the applicant of the later mark, the relevant public will put greater attention buying such goods because they are traditional and consumed by connoisseurs.

The court dismissed these arguments because they weren’t supported by necessary evidences due to which accepted that the relevant public would only have an average degree of attention.

The court considered the signs as visually similar based on the identical Clan words presented in both of them at the beginning.

On top of this, the court accepted both marks as similar from conceptual point of view taking into account the fact that the word Clan has a meaning of people belonging to a group or family.

The applicant’s arguments that there were many whisky producers using Clan with the relevant family name which makes Clan low distinctive word were dismissed to. The court considered that those family names make a distinction between the marks and in the present case the lack of such name supports the conclusion for similarity between the signs which are for identical goods too.