By BR Rutherfold. Introduction The present article presents how the British Trade Mark Act of 1994 and Trade Mark Act of 1993 of South Africa is designed.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
5th Liaison Meeting on Trade Marks
Advertisements

Intel & LOreal - the story so far Simon Malynicz 7 April 2009.
Ch. 18 Guided Reading and Review answers
BORDER MEASURES AND GOODS IN TRANSIT
Working world wide against HIV for the health and human rights of men who have sex with men Working world wide against HIV for the health and human rights.
Discharge of contract A contract may come to an end by virtue of: i.performance ii.agreement iii.breach or iv.Operation of law, especially frustration.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Dispute Settlement and Effective Enforcement of IP.
INITIAL INTEREST CONFUSION IN EUROPEAN TRADE MARK LAW The Hon Mr Justice Richard Arnold 19th Fordham IP Law & Policy Conference New York City 28 April.
IP Protection in Thailand
DEALING WITH IP ISSUES IN A FRANCHISING AGREEMENT by Tan Tee Jim, S.C. Senior Partner, Head, IP & IT, Lee & Lee Lahore, December 2007.
D&O Issues for Closely Held Corporations Simon Bieber Emerging Issues in Directors’ and Officers’ Liability 2013 Law Society of Upper Canada March 4, 2013.
Laws applicable to Trade Mark Common law Legislation - Trade Marks Act 1976 and Trade Marks Regulations Trade Descriptions Act 1972 P.
Trade-Mark Infringement. Three Types of Infringement s.19 – Use of the same mark in respect of the same wares s.19 – Use of the same mark in respect of.
Chapter 18: The Federal Court System Section 1
© 2012 Lathrop & Gage LLP Presented by: Lincoln D. Bandlow, Esq. Lathrop & Gage LLP 1888 Century Park East, Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA
By Prof. A. Damodaran Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore
RED DE PROPIEDAD INTELLECTUAL E INDUSTRIAL EN LATINOAMÉRICA PILA-Network is a project co-funded by the European Union in the framework of the ALFA programme.
 The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices was adopted by the government in 1969 and the MRTP Commission was set up in  The act came into.
Strengthening the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Ukraine Activity October 2014.
8th WIPO Advanced Research Forum on Intellectual Property Rights, WIPO- Geneva, May 26-28, 2014 The need for a fair referential trademark use from the.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES/ GOALS/ SWBAT
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 11, 2007 Trademark – Dilution.
Trademark Issues in Current Negotiations Prof. Christine Haight Farley American University.
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School April 8, 2009 Dilution.
According to PTO, a trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination thereof, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods.
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School April 2, 2008 Dilution.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 11, 2008 Trademark – Domain Names.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES/ GOALS/ SWBAT
Chapter 5 Intellectual Property & Internet Law
Software Protection & Scope of the Right holder Options for Developing Countries Presentation by: Dr. Ahmed El Saghir Judge at the Council of State Courts.
FUNDAMENTALS OF TRADEMARK LAW THE HONORABLE BERNICE B. DONALD U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN SEPT. 18, 2013 LAHORE, PAKISTAN.
1 International Legal Framework for the Protection of Geographical Indications Warsaw, 26 April 2006 Denis Croze Acting Director Advisor Economic Development.
S P O O R & F I S H E R ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN SOUTH AFRICA: THE COUNTERFEIT GOODS ACT Mohamed Khader Spoor & Fisher November 2005.
Seminar IP and Creative SMEs WIPO, May 26, 2010 IP reforms: a need for horizontal fair use? Prof. Dr. Martin Senftleben VU University Amsterdam Bird &
NON CONFUSION INFRINGEMENT OF ® Prof. Charles Gielen Milan 20 June 2007.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS. AN OVERVIEW TRADEMARKS DESIGNS COPYRIGHT UTILITY PATENT UTILITY MODEL IP & ENFORCEMENT - HOW SWAROVSKI HANDLES CONTENT.
Trademark II Infringement. Article 57 Infringement Article 57 Any of the following conduct shall be an infringement upon the right to exclusively use.
1 TRADEMARK COURT CASES IN LITHUANIA © Giedrė Domkutė, Partner, Advocate Vilnius, 2007 TRADEMARK COURT CASES IN LITHUANIA © Giedrė Domkutė, Partner, Advocate.
Oppositions and enforcement related to the European Community Trademarks - practical issues Markpatent Seminar, Ahmedabad, February 2010.
C H A P T E R 18 The Federal Court System
GUIDELINES ON THE NAME OF A COMPANY UNDER COMPANIES ACT 2013 PXV Law Partners.
2013 IP Scholars Roundtable Drake University, April 12-13, 2013 Trademark Law and the Public Domain Prof. Martin Senftleben VU University Amsterdam Bird.
1 Twinning Project “Strengthening the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Ukraine” TRADEMARKS IN EU Monica POP, Prosecutor IPR.
Chapter 17-Intellectual Property Protection Intellectual Property Rights  There are various forms of Intellectual property rights (IP rights) and they.
What is Copyright? Copyright is a form of intellectual property protection granted under Indian law to the creators of original works of authorship such.
Trademark Law Institute Amsterdam October 15 and 16, 2010 Concepts of marks with a reputation Jan Rosén Professor of Private Law Stockholm University.
TRADE MARKS: LATEST EU CASE LAW ON ENFORCEMENT By Annick Mottet Haugaard Attorney at law, 2nd Vice President ECTA International Baltic Conference on Intellectual.
© Melanie Fiedler, Attorney at law 2005 Sofia The Community Trade Mark The functions of a trade mark distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking.
FABRIZIO MONCALVO Case analysis. Case Analysis  Where the services of an intermediary, such as an operator of a website, have been used by a third party.
1 Patent Claim Interpretation under Art. 69 EPC – Should prosecution history be used to interpret the patent? presented at Fordham 19th Annual Conference.
Dr. Roger Ward.  It is a source of Congressional power to regulate interstate commerce is the Commerce Clause in Article I, Section 8.  According to.
1 Trademark Infringement and Dilution Steve Baron March 6, 2003.
CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION OF DESIGN. Cancellation of Registration Outlines of Presentation Sec 19 (1) (a) to (e) and (2) Rule 29 (1) to (13) – Procedure.
The Community Trade Mark (CTM) System. The Legal Framework Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark Council Regulation.
Tenth WIPO Advanced IP Research Forum Geneva, May 24 to 26, 2016 Trademark Law and Consumer Perception Are We Protecting Consumers or Traders? Lotte Anemaet.
Page 1 24 November 2009 LLM in Intellectual Property Law – University of Turin  Impact of EC Law on National Practices: the Example of France.
“Bad Faith” Trademark Filings/Registrations: TIPO’s Solution Jeffrey CHEN TIPO, Chinese Taipei 37 th IPEG Meeting in Medan 1.
Ip4inno 1 A.Copyright B. ‘Reputation’ and common law trade marks C. Unregistered designs D. Semiconductor topography right.
Trademarks III Infringement of Trademarks
CIPIL: Exhaustion Without Exasperation, 15 March 2014 Double Identity, Origin Function and International Exhaustion Prof. Dr.
International IP Roundtable UNLV, 8 April Seizure of Goods in Transit
Trade Marks, Brexit and Parallel Importation
THE SCOPE OF PROTECTION OF WELL-KNOWN TRADEMARKS
Recent CJEU case law Fordham IP Conference, 25 April 2014 Prof. Dr
6th TLI Symposium Trademark Law and Other Rights in Distinctive Signs (30 October 2015) _________________________ Registered Trade Marks and Unregistered.
8th Trademark Law Institute Symposium
Professor Thomas Riis Centre for Information and Innovation Law
JUDICIAL NOTES.
Honest trade practices and the essential function of the trade mark
Prof. Dr. Martin Senftleben Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Presentation transcript:

By BR Rutherfold

Introduction The present article presents how the British Trade Mark Act of 1994 and Trade Mark Act of 1993 of South Africa is designed in the line of the TRIPS Agreement and European Directives and provides broad protection to the trade mark proprietor. However, the higher judiciary of both the nations have with a view to reduce the monopolistic impact of these provisions have made a narrow interpretation to these provisions. While the European Court of Justice has taken a liberal approach while interpreting these provisions.

South African Trade Mark Act, 1993 (a) the unauthorised use of a registered trade mark or confusingly similar mark in relation to goods or services for which the trade mark is registered (primary infringement). (b) the unauthorised use of a registered trade mark or confusingly similar mark in relation to goods or services which are similar to the goods or services for which the trade mark is registered where there exists a likelihood of confusion (extended use). (c) the unauthorised use of a registered trade mark or confusingly similar mark in relation to any goods or services if such trade mark is well known in South Africa and the use thereof is likely to take unfair advantage of, or erode or dilute the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark. A likelihood of confusion is not required. (dilution)

Primary Infringement The previous Trade Mark Act, 1963 of South Africa provides two kinds of infringement: (i) unauthorised use of the trade mark as a trade mark or confusingly similar mark as a trade mark in relation to goods for which the trade mark was registered. (ii) unauthorised use of trade mark or confusingly similar mark otherwise than as a trade mark. In the new Trade Mark Act, 1993 no express distinction is made between the use of trade mark by the infringer as trade mark or otherwise than as a trade mark.

Judicial approach  Arsenal Football Club Plc. vs. Reed The European Court of Justice has propounded the ‘essential function rule’. According to the court the essential function of trade mark is to guarantee the identity of ‘origin of the market goods or services’ to the owner. Once it has been found that, the use of the sign in question by the third party is liable to affect the guarantee of origin of the goods, the trade mark proprietor must be allowed to prevent such use and it is immaterial in which context the sign is used.  Anheuser-Busch Inc. vs. Budejovicky Budvar, Narodni podnik.  Adam Opel AG vs. Autec AG.

 R vs. Johnstone In this case the House of Lords has deviated from the ruling of the European Court of Justice, has said that non-trade mark use does not infringe the right of proprietor of trade mark. Therefore, to constitute primary infringement, the European Court of Justice requires the impairment of the origin function of trade mark whereas the House of Lords requires use of allegedly infringing mark as trade mark.

 Verimark (Pty) Ltd. vs. BMW AG  The SC of Appeal in South Africa said that the purpose of trade mark registration is to protect the mark as a budge of origin.  To ascertain whether a mark is infringing the proprietors trade mark the context of use much be considered.  Commercial Auto Glass (Pty) Ltd. vs. BMW AG  The infringement under section 34 (1) (a) is restricted to trade mark use only.

Extended Infringement A similar approach is taken by both the British court (R vs. Johnstone) and South African Court (Verimark case) for this clause also, that is, only use of mark as a trade mark would constitute infringement under this section.

Dilution Article 5 (2) of European Directives, section 34 (1) (c) of South African Trade Mark Act & section 10 (3) of British Trade Mark Act It states that the proprietor of a well-known trade mark is entitled to prevent any unauthorised use in the course of trade of his registered trade mark or a similar mark in relation to any goods or services if the use complained of would be likely to either: (i) take unfair advantage of distinctive character of the registered trade mark; (ii) take unfair advantage of repute of the registered trade mark; (iii) be detrimental to the distinctive character of the registered trade mark; or (iv) be detrimental to the repute of the registered trade mark.

Detriment The term detriment suggests damage to the distinctive character of or repute of trade mark. Detriment to distinctive charterDetriment to repute It is also known as dilution by blurring. It occurs when a well known trade mark is used by others in relation to variety of other products. This leads to gradual consumer disassociation of the mark from the proprietor’s product. Also known as tarnishment. It occurs when a trade mark is used in relation to inferior products, or in offensive or negative context. This leads to unfavourable association attaching to the mark and consequent erosion of repute of the mark.

Judicial approach  Laugh it Off Promotions CC vs. South African Breweries International Finance BV t/a Sabmark International & Another.  The SC of appeal has added the requirement of unfairness in detrimental clause.  R vs. Johnstone  The House of Lords concluded that dilution clause also demands use as trade marks as pre-requisite for liability.  Verimark Case  The requirement of unfair use was also accepted by the Court of South Africa.  The use of mark as a trade mark is not required for the liability under this clause.

Conclusion To restrain the monopolistic impact of trade mark infringing provisions, the Courts in Europe and South Africa have not only interpreted the infringing provisions in restricted manner, but they have also added some requirement to constitute infringement of right of trade mark proprietor.

Indian Scenario In a country like India where a substantial proportion of the population is illiterate, wide power has been given to proprietor of trade mark against the infringer. Judicial approach- Indian judiciary has also interpreted the infringement provisions liberally. Glaxo Smith Kline Pharmaceutical Ltd. vs. Unitech Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.  Use of FEXIM is held infringement of plaintiff’s trade mark PHEXIM.

Conti.... M/s Bikanervala vs. M/s Agarwal Bikanervala  A party using deceptively similar mark only for a single shop can be stopped using it. N.R. Dongre vs. Whirlpool Cor. Ltd.  Even if a company is not doing business in the country, but it is a well known company or well known goods, then also it would be entitled to get authority over its trademark.

Thank You Any Question ?