|
Annual Conference update
|
|
 Delegates at this year's MARQUES Annual Conference can benefit from 16 hours of educational opportunities in the sessions being held from 13 to 24 September
|
|
Read More >>
|
|
10th anniversary of EUIPN
|
|
 EUIPO has published a Celebratory Report marking the 10th anniversary of the EU Intellectual Property Network (EUIPN)
|
|
Read More >>
|
|
Madrid Yearly Review
|
|
 Madrid international applications fell by 0.6% to 63,800 in 2020, according to WIPO's Madrid Yearly Review, published earlier this month
|
|
Read More >>
|
|
Record filings at EUIPO
|
|
 In a video message posted on 19 July, EUIPO Executive Director Christian Archambeau said the Office received 100,000 EUTM applications in the first six months of 2021
|
|
Read More >>
|
|
Malta joins IP Register in Blockchain
|
|
New WIPO IP Portal
|
|
 On 1 July the Industrial Property Registrations Directorate (IPRD) of the Maltese Commerce Department installed an IP Register in Blockchain node and transferred 60,000 records to TMview and DesignView through a blockchain network
|
|
 WIPO has released a new version of the WIPO IP Portal, which provides access to its full range of IP services, including the registration of trade marks, designs and GIs
|
|
Read More >>
|
|
Read More >>
|
|
EU General Court trade mark cases
|
|
There were lots of trade mark judgments from the EU General Court in July. Here’s a selection of decisions covering non-traditional marks, genuine use and likelihood of confusion
|
|
Read More >>
|
|
EU General Court design decisions
|
|
A summary of two recent cases relating to RCDs
|
|
Transportable building: In Case T-373/20, the General Court upheld a ruling on the invalidity of the pictured design for transportable buildings, saying it produced the same overall impression as earlier-disclosed designs (see photo of an example). The Court said: "The overall impression of the designs at issue is dominated by a simple cuboid geometric shape with rounded corners, with a door placed between two transparent panels, contrasting with the non-transparent base, side walls and roof." It added that the informed user displayed a relatively high level of attention and particular vigilance. "In view of the high degree of freedom enjoyed by the designer in developing the contested design, the differences concerning the transparency of the back of the transportable building and door as well as the protrusion on the roof are not sufficient to produce a different overall impression on the informed user and to dispel the impression of 'déjà vu' from the point of view of that user of the contested design in relation to the earlier design," said the Court. Lighting apparatus: The Court upheld the validity of a design for lighting apparatus, saying it created a different overall impression from earlier figurative EU trade mark registrations in Case T-492/20. The Court said: "The effect of light caused by the combination between the mirror and the small lamps does not go unnoticed and this characteristic is not present in the earlier marks. Furthermore, the outline of the contested design differs from that of the earlier marks. While the frame shape of the contested design depicts a standing teddy bear with slender legs and somewhat larger ears pointing upward, the teddy bear depicted by the earlier marks is seated with thicker legs and low ears that stand out from the side of the head."
|
|
New misleading letter alert
|
|
MARQUES Media Roundup
|
|
EUIPO has warned about a new misleading letter being circulated, which takes the form of a fake EUTM payment reminder letter using the EUIPO logo, name, acronym and address, and purports to be an EUTM payment reminder issued and electronically signed by a senior manager of the Office
|
|
 Keep up to date with news about all the latest decisions, events and IP Office developments – as well as updates on the Annual Conference – on the MARQUES blogs and social media
|
|
Read More >>
|
|
Read More >>
|
Issue 127
