Issue 112
  April 2020
Contents:
 

New resources for members

>  
 

ACPT Team analyse counterfeit pharmaceuticals

>  
 

A breakthrough for GIs

>  
 

How did you mark World IP Day?

>  
 

WIPO online resources

>  
 

Latest information on scammers

>  
 

New e-learning modules

>  
 

Latest CJEU judgments

>  
 

DesignEuropa deadline extended

>  
 

MARQUES Media Roundup

>  
 
Disclaimer:
The views expressed by contributors to this newsletter are their own and do not necessarily reflect the policy and/or opinions of MARQUES and/or its membership.  Information is published only as a guide and not as a comprehensive authority on any of the subjects covered.  While every effort has been made to ensure the information given is accurate and not misleading neither MARQUES nor the contributors can accept any responsibility for any loss or liability perceived to have arisen from the use or application of any such information or for errors and omissions.  Readers are strongly advised to follow up articles of interest with quoted sources and specialist advisors.
 

9 Cartwright Court
Cartwright Way
Bardon
Leicester
LE67 1UE
United Kingdom
T: +44 116 274 7355
F: +44 116 274 7365
E: info@marques.org
New resources for members

MARQUES is launching new educational and networking initiatives to support members in the current crisis, including webinars and a weekly Virtual Coffee Break email. The next webinar is on Brand Protection in a Time of Turmoil and is on 14 May

Read More >>
ACPT Team analyse counterfeit pharmaceuticals

Members of the MARQUES Anti-Counterfeiting and Parallel Trade Team have published two articles on the issue of counterfeit pharmaceuticals

Read More >>
A breakthrough for GIs

Marijana Kozakijevic of the MARQUES GI Team explains the importance of the entry into force of the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications

Read More >>
How did you mark World IP Day?

 

Innovate for a Green Future was the theme of this year's World IP Day on 26 April

Read More >>
WIPO online resources   Latest information on scammers, and meetings of EUIPO Anti-Scam Network and Users Group

WIPO is hosting a number of webinars that may be of interest to MARQUES members. Plus: Director General Francis Gurry has presented his annual report

 

On 29 April, Willem Leppink, who heads the MARQUES Anti-Fraud Task Force, and Alessandra Romeo, MARQUES External Relations Officer, joined the 5th Anti-Scam Network Meeting, led by EUIPO. MARQUES was also represented at the EUIPO User Group Meeting held on the same day

Read More >>   Read More >>
New e-learning modules

The EUIPO and MARQUES have developed two new e-learning modules within the framework of the ECP3 Academy Learning Portal cooperation project

Read More >>
Latest CJEU judgments

The CJEU has published rulings in the Coty v Amazon, Gomboc Kutato and Gugler France cases

Read More >>
DesignEuropa deadline extended   MARQUES Media Roundup

The call for entries for the DesignEuropa Awards 2020 has been extended to 8 May

 

The MARQUES blogs include articles on recent developments in trade mark and design law, including updates from China, Turkey and Ecuador

Read More >>  


Recent blog posts include:

Michael Jordan wins latest TM case in China

The Supreme People's Court (SPC) has ruled in favour of Michael Jordan in a case concerning the Chinese character “乔丹” (Qiaodan) in class 25. Ling Zhao of the MARQUES China Team reports.

In March 2020, the SPC issued decision (2018) Zui Gao Fa Xing Zai No 32, making a final judgment in the trade mark dispute over the registration number 6020578 (pictured right) in class 25 covering the goods "clothing, shoes, hats, socks, etc." between Michael Jordan and Qiaodan Sports, a Chinese company.

Read the full post: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46/?XID=BHA4856

Turkish Court of Appeal rules on likelihood of confusion

The Turkish Court of Appeal has overturned lower court decisions in a case concerning likelihood of confusion between trade marks sharing a common weak element. The decision of the Court of Appeal shows that likelihood of confusion between trade marks should be evaluated comprehensively, especially if the contested phrase includes additional well-known trade marks as an element. Therefore, one common phrase is not sufficient for trade marks to be confused, even if it is the main element in the mark. 

Read the full post by Güldeniz Doğan Alkan and Ayşenur Çıtak: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46/?XID=BHA4851

Be among the first to get the latest updates by signing up for email alerts for the Class 46 and Class 99 blogs, following MARQUES on Twitter and joining the discussion group on LinkedIn.

Unsubscribe:
You can unsubscribe from this emailing list or change the frequency and type of information you receive from MARQUES at anytime by logging into the MARQUES website and clicking on the Preferences tab in the My Profile section of the My Account page.  Alternatively you can reply to this email with the subject 'NewsChannel - Unsubscribe' to be removed from this mailing list.