It looks like nothing was found at this location. Maybe try one of the links below or a search?
Popular Articles:
-
Oh Cannabis!
-
Cocktail lovers – watch out! Are alcoholic drinks similar to non-alcoholic ones (and if only for trademark purposes)?
-
Geographical Indications: India’s PGI application for ‘Basmati’
-
No monopoly on blue and silver for Red Bull
-
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. Time to rethink the EUTM “unitary character”.
-
Trademark case: ACT 898 Products Inc. v. WS Industries Inc., USA
Recent Articles:
-
Registration of the protected designation of origin “HALLOUMI” in the EU – The General Court comes to the rescue of the European Commission and of the Republic of Cyprus
-
‘Don’t fence me in’: what if your locally used trade name is in between one proprietor’s earlier trade name and a corresponding younger trade mark? – the finale of the Classic Coach Company case
-
Samsung v Swatch: the UK Court of Appeal departs from the EU approach to the E-Commerce Directive ‘safe harbour defence’
-
Healthy things and Paris Bar – two new GC decisions on “weak marks”
-
Anti- Counterfeiting, Czech Republic, EU trade mark law, Exhaustion of rights, Grey online sales, Parallel imports, Trademark
Information claim the Czech way: smell of partial victory for Chanel against online retailer
-
UK trade mark law post-Brexit: the UK Court of Appeal diverges from the CJEU in statutory acquiescence
Random Articles:
-
Top 3 posts of the autumn from our IP law blogs
-
Norway: Never stop exploring promotional slogans
-
CHRISTMAS IN EU TRADEMARKS – Happy Holidays from the Kluwer Trademark Blog Editors!
-
Spain: new PTO cancellation proceedings and more news about trademark proceedings
-
USA: Solid 21, Inc. v. Hublot of America, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No. 15-56036, 24 March 2017
-
Teva’s headache over slogan trade marks
-
Apples and Pears
-
Trademark case: In re Reelex Packaging Solutions Inc., USA
-
Community Designs, universal disclosure
-
Case law, Denmark, Infringement action, Likelihood of confusion, similarity of goods and services, Similarity of marks
Denmark: No likelihood of confusion between trademarks based on the same fictional character