Week’s news headlines – jan. 23rd 2015

Supreme Court’s Trademark Tacking Decision: Possible Impact on Likelihood of Confusion?

The Supreme Court’s decision that juries should decide whether consumers would consider two marks to be the same for the purpose of trademark tacking may help resolve a split in the circuits as to whether the likelihood of confusion in trademark cases is purely factual, a question of law, or one that is a mixed question of fact and law.

Saiba mais em: http://www.natlawreview.com/article/supreme

 

 

Kim Kardashian Claims Ownership Of The Selfie: Could She Trademark The Term?

Kim Kardashian may not be filming Keeping Up with the Kardashians as much as she used to, but she successfully manages to keep her name in the press. And this week, Kim offered up some interesting comments in regards to pictures of herself. It is no secret that the concept of a “selfie” was super popular a few years ago, and the word was officially entered into the dictionary after many younger people decided to take pictures of themselves.

Saiba mais em: http://www.inquisitr.com/1778471/kim-kardashian

 

 

Alonso, a favor de que se abra un debate sobre las patentes de medicamentos
El ministro de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad, Alfonso Alonso, ha reconocido que las patentes de los medicamentos innovadores como los de la hepatitis C dependen de la legislación europea, pero le parece “bien” que se abra el debate para poder abaratar su precio.
Saiba mais em: http://www.infosalus.com/actualidad/noticia

 

 

Google, Voss, Macy’s Brands, Dish: Intellectual Property

Google Inc. (GOOG:US), maker of the world’s most-used search engine, received a patent on an invention that may advance instant-print photography in the digital realm.

Patent 8,937,727, issued Jan. 20, covers what Mountain View, California-based Google calls a “portable handheld device with multi-core image processor.”

Saiba mais em: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2015-0

 

 

 

Seahawks try to trademark the word ‘boom,’ even the number 12

The Seahawks are trying to trademark the word “boom,” the phrase “Go Hawks” and the number “12,” part of a quiet yet aggressive legal strategy to make money from the team’s growing brand.

Football and the word “boom” have been married for decades, long before someone nicknamed Seahawks defenders the “Legion of Boom.” Way back in the 1960s, Minnesota Vikings running back Bill Brown was known as “Boom-Boom” for his similarly punishing style.

Saiba mais em: http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2025515421_seahawkstrademarksxml.html

 

 

Supreme Court rules tacking together of trademarks an issue for jury

The Supreme Court ruled [opinion, PDF] unanimously Wednesday in Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank et. al. [SCOTUSblog materials] that whether two trademarks may be tacked together for purposes of determining priority is a question for the jury, not the court. The court stated that arguments made by petitioner in support of the view that tacking was a question of law meant to be decided by the court were unpersuasive.

Saiba mais em: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2015/01/supreme-court

 

 

GA Supreme Court hears lawsuit over The Vein Guys trademark

The Georgia Supreme Court is hearing a case about who owns the trademarks of Vein Care Pavilion of the South, which includes The Vein Guys, a Columbia County plastic surgery business.

The dispute began in 2010 with the sudden death of Dr. Keith L. Davis. Before his death, Davis had founded Vein Care Pavilion of the South with Dr. Steven M. Roth. One of the trademarks of the medical practice is The Vein Guys, a practice that provides treatment of vericose veins.

Saiba mais em: http://www.myfoxal.com/story/27905232/ga-supreme

 

 

 

Fox loses U.S. copyright claims over Dish ad-skipper

A U.S. judge has rejected portions of Twenty-First Century Fox Inc’s lawsuit seeking to stop Dish Network Corp from selling devices that let viewers skip over commercials when playing back shows.

In a decision made public on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee in Los Angeles rejected copyright claims that Fox had brought over the Hopper, Dish’s digital recording device.

Saiba mais em: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/

 

 

Sorry, Qualcomm, Apple – your patents don’t scare us

Analysis Patent royalties make up a higher proportion of cellular device costs than in most other markets, so the IPR game has been a hard-fought and sometimes vicious one. At the start of 2015, various developments suggest that the playground bullies of the past will lose a lot of their power. Qualcomm is on the defensive in China, while the holders of fundamental mobile patents are hitting back against Apple.

Saiba mais em: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/01/20/qualcomm_and_apple_wil

 

 

Teva, Microsoft, Nestle, Uber: Intellectual Property

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (TEVA) won a U.S. Supreme Court patent ruling that will help forestall generic competition to its top-selling Copaxone, a multiple-sclerosis drug.

Saiba mais em: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2015-01-2

 

 

Beware of fraudulent trademark solicitations and invoices

Fraudulent solicitations and invoices for trademark services are on the rise, inundating trademark applicants and registrants with offers to perform potentially unnecessary services. These solicitations often come in the form of invoices, with prominent false “due dates.” Alternatively, they look like official communications, on letterhead and with an envelope designed to make it appear like it comes from a government agency, and with a request for instructions and payment.

Saiba mais em: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.asp

 

 

China: Trademark Distinctiveness Affects The Determination Of Preemptive Registration In Bad Faith

The latter half of Article 32 of the Chinese Trademark Law 2013 (Article 31 of the Chinese Trademark Law 2001) stipulates that” preemptive registration by unfair means of a trademark with certain fame already used by another party” shall not be approved (“Bad Faith Filing Provision”). From the literal understanding of such provision, the fame of the trademark with prior use and the bad faith of the applicant of the disputed trademark are two requirements for application of law for the Bad Faith Filing Provision. In addition, the originality (namely, inherent distinctiveness, known as trademark distinctiveness)

Saiba mais em: http://www.mondaq.com/x/367904/Trademark/Trademark

 

 

From BANANE HERMES to ‘Crying CHANEL’: is trademark parody allowed?

Investment in the cultural and creative industries in Taiwan has grown significantly, especially in 2014 (for further details please see “Increasing investment in the cultural and creative industries”), and it is hoped that this growth will continue. While local laws and rules set the boundaries of legal protection for IP rights and guard against infringement, court decisions provide practical guidance on the scope of what can and cannot be done – especially in fact-intensive cases such as trademark disputes.

Saiba mais em: http://www.iam-magazine.com/reports

 

 

CARICOM And Intellectual Property Law: What Next?

The year 2015 has dawned with the usual fanfare of greater things to come. Caribbean projects are in the pipeline, along with activities to enhance competitiveness and many gallant efforts by well-meaning non-governmental and international organisations. The research has shown, however, that without the impetus of effort that originates from among the local innovators, there is no real change and no great advancement.

Saiba mais em: http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleane

Read more

New Jurisdiction for Copyright Infringement Suits in Rio

Effective January 13, 2015, the new Code of Judiciary Organization and Division of the State of Rio de Janeiro establishes that the seven Corporate District Courts of Rio de Janeiro now have exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving copyrights.

 

Since 2001, the Corporate District Courts have had exclusive jurisdiction for hearing Industrial Property matters, such as infringement lawsuits concerning trademark, patent and industrial design rights. Meanwhile, lawsuits involving copyright have been ruled by the Civil District Courts, which have a subsidiary jurisdiction, encompassing all kinds of unspecialized litigation, from agreements to consumer rights, and even to real estate.

 

Time has shown that the specialization of the Corporate District Court in IP Rights has been beneficial to both the parties and the Judiciary, leading to faster and more firmly grounded decisions.

 

The inclusion of copyright lawsuits in the specialized jurisdiction of Corporate District Courts is expected to lead to similar results as those achieved in other types of industrial property cases.

 

For more details please feel free to contact us:

diblasi@diblasi.com.br

Read more

Our Offices

developed by
Pedro.am