Search results

Selected filters:

Brand management

Article type




2,922 results found for your search

Sort options
25 April 2006


25 April 2006


25 April 2006

El Salvador

25 April 2006


25 April 2006


25 April 2006


25 April 2006


25 April 2006


25 April 2006


25 April 2006


20 April 2006

Licence can survive bankruptcy of licensor, court rules

The Federal Supreme Court has ruled that a licensee can continue to use a licensed IP right when the licensor has been declared bankrupt and the receiver wishes to terminate the licence agreement. The case demonstrates that it is possible to find contractual provisions between the licensor and the licensee that are not caught by the Insolvency Code.

13 April 2006

Fifth Circuit rules that inconclusive trademark settlement is crackers

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has found that a final judgment terminating a trademark infringement action pursuant to a settlement agreement between the parties, did not necessarily prevent the defendant, a snack-food manufacturer, from later claiming non-infringement or relying on defences to infringement.

13 April 2006

Assigned rights may not include right to terminate, court rules

The Federal Court of Australia has ruled that the assignee of a trademark did not have the power to terminate a sub-licence for use of the mark. The case raises awkward questions for a licensor where the licence agreement does not confer upon the licensor a specific power to assign the benefit of the agreement without the consent of the licensee.

29 March 2006

Sky wins damages for infringing TV use in hotels

Judge Peter Kelly in the High Court has awarded Sky €128,408 in damages for copyright and trademark infringements, after the Clarion and Merrion hotels in Dublin unwittingly used a supply of Sky television channels that had not been authorized by Sky. Sky found out about the infringement after it appointed a piracy specialist based in Dublin.

17 March 2006

Transfer of mark made up of personal name not deceptive

Advocate General Colomer has stated that the transfer of ownership of a trademark consisting of the name of a person does not necessarily deceive consumers, even if the mark evokes the mistaken impression that the person took part in the design and creation of the goods for which it is used.