Western companies with trademark rights in Russia are feeling the ripple effects of the Ukrainian conflict. In response to the economic sanctions and boycotts imposed by the U.S. and other Western countries, Russia has threatened to suspend the intellectual property rights of companies that have ceased operations in Russia. Additionally, there has recently been an increase in bad faith trademark filings for various brands across a wide range of industries from Chanel to Audi. Moreover, it appears that Russian courts may allow the infringement and misappropriation of trademarks owned by Western companies in light of a recent decision involving the character Peppa Pig, where the court cited sanctions as a basis for refusing to recognize the Western-based company’s intellectual property rights in the popular cartoon character.
Even those businesses with longstanding ties within Russia don’t appear to be safe. Certain companies closing locations in the country in response to the conflict in Ukraine are finding that third parties are filing trademark applications for blatant replicas of their brands. Even more disturbing is that should the Russian government decide to remove trademark protections for Western companies altogether, then a third party could step in and offer goods and services under identical marks. Depending upon how things play out in Russia, Western brand owners are in serious danger of losing their intellectual property investments in the country. Exacerbating the problem for these brands is that finding local counsel willing to assist them may be extremely difficult. Fear for personal safety and the threat of retribution may encourage many trademark attorneys in Russia to steer clear of matters involving companies from “unfriendly” countries.
Wondering why you haven’t received any updates on the progress of your client’s Madrid Protocol application designating Canada? After reading that question, are you wondering what on earth a Madrid Protocol application is?
Let’s take a step back. The Madrid system is a mechanism that facilitates the registration of trademarks in multiple jurisdictions around the world. One way to file trademark applications in multiple jurisdictions is to engage local counsel in each jurisdiction of interest and work with counsel to file individual applications. By using the Madrid system, however, a trademark owner can file a single international trademark application with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and designate one or more jurisdictions based on just this one application.
We recently shared our Seven Secrets of Security Interests with some tips about security interests in IP registered in the U.S. But often, U.S. IP goes hand-in-hand with trademarks, patents, and copyrights registered in Canada. Should security interests against Canadian IP be treated the same as in the U.S.?
We asked our colleague Silvia de Sousa from Thompson Dorfman Sweatman LLP in Winnipeg, Manitoba to describe the basics of security interests involving Canadian trademarks (as well as patents and copyrights). Silvia’s answers appear below. Enjoy!
This month’s dramatic announcement by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that all foreign domiciled trademark applicants, registrants and parties to USPTO trademark proceedings will now be required to retain U.S. counsel is expected to result in the most significant practical change to domestic trademark prosecution practice in years.
For casual observers, this new rule — set to be effective on Aug. 3, 2019 — may have arrived as an unexpected, or even shocking, development. After all, with this announcement, literally tens of thousands of active, foreign-domiciled participants in the trademark processes of the USPTO will suddenly now require representation by a U.S. attorney, altering years of common practice.
Moreover, the time from announcement to implementation — only 32 days — is remarkably short for agency action of any kind, let alone a new rule set to transform the role of trademark practitioners in relation to a massive class of new clients.
This post is for those who gain pleasure from tidying up. It’s springtime here in DC, so let’s roll up our sleeves and declutter! Your trademark portfolio, that is. You’ll gain a sense of accomplishment AND you can humble-brag about your magical money-saving skills.
As the proud owner of a trademark, you will encounter a number of situations that may prompt you or your company to consider granting a trademark license. Navigating the process of selecting a mark, conducting a trademark search and securing a trademark registration is no small feat. Now that you have accomplished these goals, it is important to make sure you are getting the most out of your investment of time, energy and money. A trademark license may be the most effective way to ensure that your trademark rights primarily benefit you and not a third party.
Businesses operating in the European Union may be familiar with the concept of “seniority.” By claiming seniority, an owner of an EU trademark registration may be able to claim prior rights based on existing national trademark registrations in EU member countries. To illustrate when a business might claim seniority, take the following example:
A trademark assignment is the transfer of ownership of a mark. This usually entails having the owner transfer all its rights, title and interest in a given mark to a third party.
Sounds pretty straightforward, right? Well, imagine you’re not just assigning one trademark to a third party – instead you’re transferring an entire portfolio containing hundreds of marks in dozens of countries. Generally, this transfer of rights must be documented – or recorded – with the trademark office in every jurisdiction where marks have been assigned. Otherwise, the outdated Trademark Office records relating to the ownership of a mark could cause issues, like blocking new applications filed in the new owner’s name. The requirements for assigning trademarks and recording this transfer of rights often vary by jurisdiction, so handling the transfer of a global trademark portfolio can become a major undertaking.
US trademark aficionados know that US registrations depicting logos in black and white allow the trademark owner to display the registered mark in any color. Filing in black and white is often a good way to achieve broader protection in the States, and it helps avoid your having to file a new application if you change the color of your logo in the future. The next time you want to protect your logo outside the USA, however, pause before you send that email to local counsel or submit your Madrid Protocol application depicting the logo in black and white. It’s not safe to assume that a black-and-white registration outside the USA confers “universal” protection for a mark displayed in any color.
To elaborate: counsel in a number of jurisdictions have informed us that black-and-white registrations may not protect marks displayed in any color. We’ve heard this from the EU, Kazakhstan, and Thailand, among other places – though you will of course want to check this with your own local counsel, since this is a fact-specific issue. Worse yet, black-and-white registrations outside the USA may be subject to attack on non-use grounds if the trademark isn’t used in black and white. (How often does that happen?!)
We haven’t run across a treatise or other resource that drills down to this level of trademark nerddom, so this might be a good topic to add to the next edition of the Country Guides (accessible to members of the International Trademark Association). In the meantime – now you’re equipped to ask some more pre-filing questions, to help ensure that your future logo applications will achieve maximum protection.
We found this update from the UK firm HGF ( www.hgf.com ) helpful, and thought you might, too — so we asked permission to re-post it here. Enjoy! P.S. Since we’re lawyers, we have to mention that HGF is not affiliated with Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, and the views expressed in this post are those of HGF, and not those of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP or its clients.– DBRanding® Blog Editors
You will no doubt have received many updates from IP law firms discussing the potentially new landscape for IP rights in the UK and EU in the longer term. Some are long, some short, some academic, but maybe not all practical.
The following briefing answers some of the more practical questions and concerns around managing your trade mark portfolio in light of Brexit. With change comes opportunity, and we at HGF are here to help you maximise that opportunity. We do not claim to know all that will transpire in the next few years come Brexit, no one does, but we hope these initial practical pointers below will help you along the way.
As a European firm of intellectual property specialists with locations in both the UK and mainland Europe, HGF will continue to offer a fully integrated team of professionals in the EU covering not only trade marks, but patents, designs, contentious and non-contentious IP law. Continue reading →
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.