Region: Philippines

Local owner loses SHANGRI-LA mark

In <i>Shangri-La International Hotel Management Ltd v Developers Group of Companies Inc</i>, the Supreme Court of the Philippines has overturned an earlier decision and has ruled that Developers Group of Companies Inc's registrations for the service mark SHANGRI-LA and an 'S' logo are void. The court ruled that the company had failed to adhere to the use requirements.

06 September 2006

VALMOX is confusingly similar to VOLMAX

In <i>Glaxo Group Limited v IAE Pharmaceutical</i>, the director of the Bureau of Legal Affairs has declared that the trademark VALMOX used on the antibiotic amoxicillin trihydrate is confusingly similar to Glaxo Group Limited's registered trademark VOLMAX used for an asthma treatment.

15 May 2006

USTR credits Philippines for effective enforcement of IP rights

The United States Trade Representative's Office has removed the Philippines from the priority watch list of countries that do not properly enforce IP rights and placed it instead on the ordinary watch list under the Special 301 Review. The move recognizes the Philippines government's attempts to enforce IP rights properly.

05 April 2006

IP reform driven forward by Supreme Court

Responding to an increasingly urgent need for the Philippine judiciary to adapt to the unique legal issues presented by IP rights, the Supreme Court of the Philippines has approved two proposals issued by the country's Intellectual Property Office: (i) the provision of specialized training on intellectual property to court personnel, and (ii) the establishment of courts that will focus solely on cases involving intellectual property.

13 February 2006

Nationwide inventory of IP cases ordered

The Department of Justice in the Philippines has ordered all its prosecutors nationwide to provide an inventory of all pending IP cases to facilitate the coordination of government agencies in the country's campaign against counterfeiting and piracy. The data gathered will allow the Intellectual Property Office to obtain an overall picture of the state of progress of this campaign.

17 October 2005

Levi's infringement and cancellation actions kept alive

The Philippine Supreme Court has ruled that an action for trademark infringement or unfair competition (including an application for an injunction and/or damages) in the ordinary courts can proceed independently or simultaneously with an action for the administrative cancellation of the registered trademark that is the subject of the infringement action.

02 September 2005

Rolex clocks up win despite non-competing business use

In <i>Montres Rolex SA v Rolex Plastic Manufacturing Corporation</i>, a court in Quezon City has ordered a local company to drop the internationally well-known trademark and trade name ROLEX from its corporate name. The court stated that although the local company was using ROLEX for a non-competing business, consumers were likely to associate it with Montres Rolex SA.

30 March 2005

'i.ph' domain may become a boon for cybergripers

DotPh, the Philippine domain name registrar, has started offering anonymous registrations under the 'i.ph' domain, the world's first anonymous domain. 'i.ph' is intended to support bloggers and individuals who maintain websites for personal purposes. However, the fact that registrants will not be identifiable means that mark owners will have little recourse against abusive use of their marks.

22 November 2004

McDonald's swallows up BIG MAK infringer - at last

In <i>McDonald's Corporation v LC Big Mak Burger Inc</i>, the Philippine Supreme Court has ruled that (i) the mark BIG MAK for hamburgers infringes McDonald's BIG MAC mark for the same goods, and (ii) the use of packaging similar to that of McDonald's constitutes unfair competition.

29 September 2004

GALLO marks for wine and cigarettes to coexist, rules court

In <i>Mighty Corporation v E & J Gallo Winery</i>, the Supreme Court of the Philippines has struck a blow against the owners of internationally well-known marks by holding that the use of the mark GALLO for tobacco products does not infringe the GALLO mark for wine.

17 September 2004

Unlock unlimited access to all WTR content