Topic: Enforcement and Litigation

Latest content

AC Milan fails to register AC MILAN mark for stationery

In a blow to AC Milan football club, the General Court has confirmed that there was a likelihood of confusion between the mark AC MILAN and the earlier German mark MILAN for Class 16 goods.

25 November 2021

IPEC ruling favours one Archangel over another

This dispute between two holistic therapists over the use of the mark ARCHANGEL ALCHEMY shows that the protection of a registered trademark may be trumped by prior unregistered rights.

25 November 2021

Nissan v EUIPO: General Court rules that E-POWER and VDL E-POWER are not confusingly similar

This dispute between Japanese car manufacturer Nissan and Dutch company VDL Groep highlights the role that company names can play within composite marks.

24 November 2021

Keeping trademarks ‘fresh’: the onus is on the opponent

This decision of the Federal Court of Australia demonstrates that unused marks can be successfully defended against non-use removal in certain circumstances.

24 November 2021

Unilever sells tea brands for $5 billion; Zeeger Vink elected 2022 INTA president; OBS Project and Streamlabs dispute – news digest

In our latest round-up, we look at Burberry winning $138,000 in attorney fees from Burberry Jesus, a new study revealing $68.9 billion of retail theft, and much more.

23 November 2021

MONSTER ENERGY case: what’s in a coffee?

The General Court has found in favour of Frito-Lay Trading Company GmbH in another of its cases against Monster Energy Co concerning the MONSTER marks.

23 November 2021

Amendments to Criminal Procedure Code set to facilitate criminal enforcement of industrial property rights

Amendments to Vietnam’s Criminal Procedure Code have recently been passed, removing a cumbersome requirement that has been hampering the enforcement authorities’ efforts to bring criminal actions against offences under Article 226.1 of the Penal Code.

23 November 2021

General Court considers likelihood of confusion between ‘Süzme Peynir’ marks

The mere fact that ‘Süzme Peynir’ means something (ie, ‘cottage cheese’) to the Turkish-speaking public was not sufficient to establish a particular category of consumers targeted by the application for PINAR SÜZME PEYNIR.

22 November 2021

Delhi High Court: intent to target Indian market is sine qua non condition to exercise jurisdiction

Tata Sons failed to prevent Hakunamatata Tata Founders and others, which deal in cryptocurrency under the name/mark TATA COIN/$ TATA, from using the trademark TATA.

19 November 2021

Supreme Court recognises need for legal certainty in assignment of IP rights

This decision of the Slovenian Supreme Court constitutes a crucial step towards legal certainty, clarifying the circumstances in which an assignment declaration or consent for transfer of an IP right will be considered valid.

19 November 2021

Get unlimited access to all WTR content