|
| |
TUESDAY, 9 MARCH 2010
Text-book - or rather: porn-film - case of tarnishment
UBS threatens to sue the Swiss distributor of a porn film with the title "USB - Our Swiss Bank" (or possibly already sued, the news article is not entirely clear). If you look at the image above I'd say that they have a pretty good case (btw, the original cover does not have the two white strips over the strategically important places; I've added them for the benefit of our American readers, where one apparently can get fired for looking at a nipple at work).
The producer notes that he is not using the trade mark UBS, but rather USB, and that the three keys, which look suspiciously like the UBS keys, are also part of the crest of his home town. Well.... these have to be the worst excuses ever. On the other hand, he got the publicity he wanted, and UBS will have great difficulty proving financial damages.
Source (with uncensored image)
Posted by: Mark Schweizer @ 19.09
Tags: tarnishment, famous mark, reputation, Switzerland, |
|
|
|
| |
TUESDAY, 9 MARCH 2010
Brands talk to mark World IP Day
 Monday 26 April is the World Intellectual Property Organization's World Intellectual Property Day and, to mark it, the IP Finance weblog has organised a mid-day seminar on "Brands and the Cost of Corporate Conscience". The speaker, who is known to MARQUES members following her dynamic presentation at last year's Brighton Conference, is Marjolijn Vencken (Trouble in Paradise).
The venue is the London office of law firm Olswang. Admission is free. Author, barrister and member of the trade mark judiciary Amanda Michaels (Hogarth Chambers) is in the chair. MARQUES members are particularly welcome! If you'd like to attend, the full details can be found here.
Posted by: Jeremy Phillips @ 10.08
Tags: World IP Day, |
|
|
|
| |
TUESDAY, 9 MARCH 2010
Switzerland: adding sparkles to your ad copy is not misleading
The Consolidated ICC Code of Advertising and Marketing Communication Practice in its article 5 states that (emphasis added by Class46):
Marketing communication should not contain any statement, or audio or visual treatment which, directly or by implication, omission, ambiguity or exaggeration, is likely to mislead the consumer [...]
A complainant brought a complaint before the Swiss Lauterkeitskommission - the self-governing body of the Swiss advertising industry - arguing that the sparkles added to the advertising copy for a tiles joint cleaner were a misleading "visual treatment" (see image). The Lauterkeitskommission disagreed: the sparkles were so obviously fake that no consumer would be misled to believe that the cleaner would actually cause the joints to sparkle.
Thank you for this show of sanity. Decision (in German) here.
Posted by: Mark Schweizer @ 09.34
Tags: icc, switzerland, marketing, |
|
|
|
| |
MONDAY, 8 MARCH 2010
An Oscar for Logorama
The animation movie Logorama received the 2010 Oscar in the Short Film (animated) category.
As previously
mentioned on Class 46, one of the particularities of this film is that its casting and set exclusivly consist in logos. In 16 minutes, you will have seen about 3000 trade marks, which, I believe, is only a little bit more than the average product placement rate for a James Bond movie. Another thing the Class 46 readership might be curious about Logorama: the movie stars collaborated without their impresario's consent.
Nicolas Schmerkin (producer of the film) declared: "I have to thank the 3,000 non-official sponsors that appear in the film. And I have to
assure them that no logos were harmed in the making of the project."
Watch an interview with the film makers (in French).
The concept of Logorama is not unlike FoodFight!, another 3D CGI film with brand characters as heros, which has been in production mode for a while now.
Posted by: Frédéric Glaize @ 14.32
Tags: |
|
|
|
| |
MONDAY, 8 MARCH 2010
Poland: the reputation of a trade mark
The Polish Patent Office invalidated the right of protection for 3MA R-171362 trade mark owned by the Polish company MARMA Polskie Folie Sp. z o.o. The proceeding were initiated by the 3M Company, the owner of 3M R-84046 and word-figurative 3M R-84047 trade marks. The American company has claimed the reputation of its signs and argued that the registration of 3MA R-171362 trade mark would bring its owner unfair advantage and it would be detrimental to the distinctive character and the reputation of 3M’s trade marks. The complaint of MARMA Polskie Folie Sp. z o.o. company was rejected by the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw in a judgment of 9 October 2009, case file VI SA/Wa 233/09.
The VAC ruled that in the absence of a legal definition of the reputation it was the legal doctrine and the courts who have defined the essential criteria for determining the reputation of the trade mark. Accordingly, the reputation of the trade mark is associated with the established opinion among customers about the characteristics of the goods bearing the mark. The reputation is not a simple consequence of the use and circulation of a trade mark, but it’s also a well-established and deeply rooted image in the consciousness of buyers of vital goods. The reputation of a trade mark is a result of the care for the high quality of products, the consistent preservation of a sign on the market by long and intensive advertising. An established reputation of a trade mark occurs when the quality of the goods bearing the sign satisfy customers who can easily recognize it and connect with the goods marked by the proprietor, even if it means that the goods are placed on the market for the first time. The reputation of a trade mark means its attractive value of advertising, the positive perceptions of the goods bearing the sign. In assessing whether the sign is reputed, one cannot take into the account only the degree of knowledge of a sign among the customers and the extent and intensity of advertising of goods bearing the sign, but also the quality of these goods. Prizes and certificates awarded for the goods bearing the sign, expert opinions and presentation of the goods at trade fairs in order to promote products also show the reputation of the trade mark.
This judgment is not yet final. A cassation complaint may be filed to the Supreme Administrative Court.
See also Class46 post entitled "Poland: proving the fame of a trade mark".
Posted by: Tomasz Rychlicki @ 10.40
Tags: Polish Patent Office, Polish courts, Polish law, Voivodeship Administrative Court, famous trade marks, reputed trade marks, |
|
|
|
| |
MONDAY, 8 MARCH 2010
What do the Netherlands Antilles and the Ukraine have in common?
The Netherlands Antilles and Ukraine have both signed up for the Singapore Treaty. In the case of the Netherlands Antilles this took effect from 10 January 2010 (for the Netherlands itself, being part of the Benelux, the Treaty will come into force on a later date). As for Ukraine, the Treaty takes effect from 24 May 2010.
Posted by: Jeremy Phillips @ 09.44
Tags: Singapore Treaty, |
|
|
|
| |
SATURDAY, 6 MARCH 2010
Russia: Euroset in a battle for a free-ride
The application proceedings brought by Euroset (internet shop) were stayed by the Russian Arbitrage Court on 3 March due to the failure of the applicant to comply with some formalities. Euroset are attempting to apply against the refusal of ROSPatent to register a word mark HALYAVA ("халява") in Classes 18, 25, 32 and 33, which include leather products, clothing and beverages containing varying percentage of alcohol.
The actual word is a slang commonly used among young people and meaning "freebie" or "free ride". Getting something "na halyavu" (as a freebie) is seen as a great achievement by teenagers (mostly) because no effort was made and no money was paid to receive the benefit in question, be it a free cake at a canteen or a free cinema screening thanks to the inattentive ticket collector.
The ground for refusal was the negative meaning of the word and its contradiction to "the society's interests" as it promotes "satisfying one's needs on others' accounts". Euroset disputed this finding, saying that the word should be regarded as a "joke". Furthermore, they already own the mark in relation to products (such as fishing and publishing equipment) and services (such as insurance, telecommunication and scientific research).
Nevertheless, Euroset's arguments were rejected because of the immoral character of the word and its negative effects on the society as a whole. Interestingly enough, ROSPatent seems to consider it immoral to imply receiving drinks and shoes on another's account whilst advertising insurance and financial services under the same mark is acceptable.
Posted by: Sasha Yelnik @ 22.24
Tags: |
|
|
|
|
|
0 comments: 
Subscribe in a reader