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:
-
USA: Solid 21, Inc. v. Hublot of America, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No. 15-56036, 24 March 2017
-
Switzerland: A drinking bottle is a banal perfume bottle – Really?
-
Ban of marks vs freedom of speech
-
Trademark case: Commodores Entertainment Corp. v. McClary, USA
-
Trademark case: Rohn v. Viacom International Inc., USA
-
Brexit – 21 days to go
-
(SKY)KICKing important questions of clarity and bad faith from the UK to the CJEU
-
Trademark case: Pocket Plus, LLC v. Pike Brands, LLC, USA
-
CJEU: Puma’s feline jumps high: EUIPO must take into account earlier decisions recognizing reputation of a mark invoked in an opposition
-
Trademark case: Tiger Lily Ventures Ltd. v. Barclays Capital Inc., USA