IAM

Legal updates

02 Mar 2015

GLISTEN held to be descriptive of purpose of cleaning products

European Union - In IOIP Holding LLC v OHIM, the General Court has upheld a decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM in which the latter had refused to register the word mark GLISTEN for cleaning products. Among other things, the court held that the board had not erred in finding that the mark applied for was, in the mind of the relevant public, descriptive of the purpose of the goods. Read update

02 Mar 2015

Courts reaffirm construction of design protection rules that is fully in line with EU law

Italy - In three recent court decisions, the Specialised IP Divisions of the Courts of Milan and Brescia have considered the protection of designs under Italian law. The Court of Milan decision is significant because it ruled on the highly disputed issue of the interpretation of the transitory rule for works created before protection for industrial designs through copyright was introduced. Read update

02 Mar 2015

EU-Ukraine Association Agreement: an update

Ukraine - In accordance with the plan for the implementation of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, relevant IP laws should be drafted by the end of July 2015 and public access to filed trademark applications should be introduced by the end of December 2016. Generally, the agreement provides for the harmonisation of the Ukrainian legislation with the EU legal framework and the resolution of a number of problematic issues in the IP sector. Read update

27 Feb 2015

Advertising slogans for financial services held to lack distinctive character

European Union - In two decisions involving the same applicant, global investment management company Blackrock Inc, the General Court has upheld decisions of the First and Fourth Boards of Appeal of OHIM finding that the marks SO WHAT DO I DO WITH MY MONEY and INVESTING FOR A NEW WORLD lacked distinctive character for services in Classes 35 and 36. Read update

27 Feb 2015

Tribunal dismisses adidas' unfair trade practice complaint against Nike

India - In adidas India Marketing Pvt Ltd v Nike India Pvt Ltd, the Competition Appellate Tribunal has held that the sale by Nike India Pvt Ltd of T-shirts bearing the name of famous cricketer Sachin Tendulkar under a sponsorship contract with the Board of Control for Cricket in India did not amount to an unfair trade practice in relation to adidas India Marketing Pvt Ltd’s brand endorsement contract with Sachin. Read update

27 Feb 2015

FIPROLINE decision overturned by Court of Appeal

New Zealand - In Virbac SA v Merial, the Court of Appeal has overturned a High Court decision in which the latter had held that the mark FIPROLINE would be confused with the opponent's FRONTLINE mark for veterinary products. The Court of Appeal's decision addressed what many had seen as an unusual assessment made by the High Court as to whether the marks were likely to be confused with one another. Read update

Close

Register for more free content

  • Read more World Trademark Review blogs and articles
  • Receive the editor's weekly review by email
Register now  
Issue 0