Search results

In our latest round-up, we look at a new study that finds 25% of online purchases are for fakes, the EU General Court ruling on a NEYMAR mark, counterfeit containers seized in Malta, tips on making a brand matter, and much more.

In a dispute between wine and spirits producers Kantina and Adol, the Slovenian Supreme Court has set aside the first and second-instance decisions, which had rejected a non-infringement action filed by Kantina on formal grounds.

The UK Intellectual Property Office has issued a somewhat unexpected decision in a case involving an application for the label mark GLENFIELD by an India-based drinks company owner, which was opposed by Scotch whisky distiller William Grant & Sons.

In Lupu v EUIPO, the EU General Court has confirmed that, within the context of opposition proceedings, relative grounds for refusal cannot be raised after the expiry of the term prescribed by law.

Spain’s EU Trademark Court has upheld a first-instance decision in which Equivalenza Retail SL had been sentenced for infringing various trademarks, owned by Hugo Boss, Gucci and Lacoste, among others, in the context of its smell-alike business. 

The Swiss Federal Administrative Court has considered an opposition filed by US tech giant Apple against Swiss watchmaker Swatch’s application for the registration of the mark TICK DIFFERENT for Class 14 goods, including jewellery and watches.

When the EU Customs Regulation does not apply, rights holders can rely on the national provisions of the French IP Code. The French Customs Code will also apply to Customs and criminal procedures.

For civil enforcement against counterfeiting, an application must be made to the ordinary courts. Preliminary ex parte measures play an important role, but are admissible only for some of the remedies available. Claims for damages, for example, can be enforced within substantive proceedings only.

Seizures and detentions of counterfeit goods took place in significant volume in Greece during 2018. Large seizures also took place involving goods in transit to neighbouring countries of the Balkan peninsula.

As an EU member state, Italy applies all the relevant EU regulations (including those on border measures) and has implemented the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and the main international agreements in this field. 

According to Turkish legislation, it is possible to register IP rights (ie, trademarks, industrial designs, patents, utility models, copyrights, geographical indications, integrated circuit topographies and plant breeders’ rights) before Customs, as the crucial first step in the fight against counterfeiting.

While Border Force may seize items suspected of infringing an IP right (including counterfeit, infringing or pirated goods) ex officio, this is quite uncommon (rights holders would still need to submit an ex officio application for action to secure destruction). Border Force will usually seize only such items where a rights holder has a customs application for action in place.

In our latest edition, we look at Guns ‘N’ Roses moving to protect a trademark, Indian farmers prevailing over PepsiCo in a potato legal battle, top Indian brands backing underdogs in Cricket World Cup, and much more.

Romania joined the European Union on 1 January 2007. Consequently, the Romanian customs authorities’ responsibility to protect the external border of the European Union increased considerably, as Romania has a significant border with non-EU countries.

No laws or regulations deal specifically with counterfeiting in Ukraine. Thus, this type of infringement is dealt with under the Trademark Law. Although that statute contains no definition of ‘counterfeit goods’, the relevant civil and criminal laws contain blanket provisions referring to the Trademark Law, particularly the definition of ‘use of a trademark’.