”Few ideas and confused”. This was a frequent comment from high school professors reviewing our test results which seems strangely apt to describe this latest attempt by the Italian Government to protect Italian companies and the so called “made in Italy”, using trade mark rights. The Ministerial Decree of 10 January 2020 set the final…
The Austrian courts recently had the opportunity to provide some clarifications as to when a geographical indication, which is not protected as such under EU legislation, may be registered as a trademark, relying on the principles established more than 20 years ago in the “Chiemsee” preliminary rulings of the Court of Justice of the EU…
The UK High Court has laid out its ruling following CJEU’s decision on SkyKick. To recap, the CJEU ruled that overly broad specifications will not automatically render a registered mark invalid and that the lack of intention to use the mark at the time of its application will not necessarily result in bad faith. What…
Russian law provides an effective instrument for preventing and detecting import of counterfeit goods and parallel import – the Customs Register of Intellectual Property (“Customs IP Register”). The Customs IP Register is kept by the Russian Federal Customs Service (“Customs”). According to the official information, at the beginning of 2020 there are more than 3200…
Evidence supported the finding that marks owned by the operator of the San Diego Comic Convention were not generic, and litigation misconduct by the defendant supported a $3.9 million attorney fee award. In the long-running trademark dispute between the operator of the well-known San Diego Comic Convention and a competitor that ran a similarly named…
Expired utility patent described the advantages of product configuration trade dress for “a beveled scalloped upper edge of a metal fastener.” The federal district court in Chicago properly determined trade dress for the design of conveyer belt fasteners owned by Flexible Steel Lacing Company (Flexco) was invalid as functional and could not be asserted against…
Red Bull GmbH v Big Horn UK Limited & Ors [2020] EWHC 124 (Ch) This case is an interesting commentary on the route that rights holders can pursue in order to challenge lookalike products. Historically, proprietors of well-known brands, particularity in the FMCG market, have found it difficult to succeed in an Article 9(2)(b) claim…
There is no per se rule providing that dismissal without prejudice of claims involving a fee-shifting statute such as the Lanham Act necessarily causes a defendant to suffer legal prejudice from being denied an opportunity to seek attorney fees. Defendants in case brought by a pet toy maker did not suffer legal harm by the…
(Updated as of 21.05.2020 due to further changes in legislation and to provide clarifications) Austria, as many other countries, adopted legal measures to extend deadlines with a view to the COVID-19 crisis. As the provisions are all but crystal clear, this is to give you an overview of which running deadlines in trademark (and other…
In February this year a dispute between the law firm FOCUS Advokater (“FOCUS Lawyers” in English) and the accounting firm Beierholm was decided by the Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court (BS-40894/2019 SHR). The case concerned the use of the name BEIERHOLM FOKUS which FOCUS Advokater found to be an infringement of their trademark rights…
