Constitutional Court denies possibility of identical trademark coexistence
The Ankara Third Civil IP Court has claimed that the principle of ‘one owner per trademark’ oversteps its purpose and the definition of ‘identically similar’ in Article 7/1(b) should constitute relative grounds for refusal, as stated in Article 8/1(b). The court further claimed that the TPI has only a subjective view of trademarks in terms of their appearance to consumers.
To read more
Register for limited access
Register to receive our newsletter and gain limited access to subscriber content.
Subscribe to unlock unlimited access
Get news, unique commentary, expert analysis and essential resources from the WTR experts.
Already have access? Login below
Copyright © Law Business ResearchCompany Number: 03281866 VAT: GB 160 7529 10