Despite the COVID-19 closures and cancellations, some governmental intellectual property offices have not extended deadlines, so parties should remain mindful that protections for individuals and businesses should not be overlooked. Many patent and trademark offices around the world are providing relief for businesses that may have difficulty tending to their intellectual property filings due to other pressing COVID-19-related concerns; some have not. Lewis Rice remains in close contact with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and worldwide foreign associates to ensure that your deadlines are not missed, and that your intellectual property will be secure when normalcy returns. We have not found any governmental intellectual property office that has changed the first-to-file rule for purposes of original patent protection, so parties should not delay filing new patents. Continue Reading
Intellectual Property Extensions Resulting from Coronavirus
United States Patent and Trademark Office-USPTO
Currently, the USPTO is not offering extensions to patent and trademark application deadlines. The USPTO is, however, offering fee waivers to those affected by the coronavirus in the following situations: Continue Reading
Facebook and Twitter fined for violation of requirements for the personal data localization
At the end of 2019, Federal Law No. 405-FZ1 entered into force. This act has significantly increased administrative liability for violations of the requirements on the localization of databases containing personal data of Russian nationals. We already wrote about this amendment earlier.
The new provisions have significantly increased the amount of fines for violation of requirements for the personal data localization. At the moment the maximum fine may be as high as RUB 18 million. Continue Reading
Should You Record a Transfer or Document against a Copyright?
Suppose that you have an assignment of a copyright or a security agreement for a copyright. Are you required to record this assignment or security agreement against the copyright registration? Should you record this assignment or security agreement with the U.S. Copyright Office? The answer is YES!
In the United States, 37 C.F.R. § 205 states that “any transfer of copyright ownership or other document pertaining to a copyright may be recorded in the Copyright Office if the document filed for recordation bears the actual signature of the person who executed it, or if it is accompanied by a sworn or official certification that it is a true copy of the original, signed document.” Thus, documents pertaining to copyrights are recorded in the U.S. Copyright Office. Continue Reading
Reviving a brand? A reminder to ensure it is put to genuine use
The case of Aiwa Co. Ltd v Aiwa Corporation is a useful reminder to brand owners, particularly those who are looking to revive a brand, of what amounts to “genuine use” of a registered trade mark. The case particularly considers whether the sale of second-hand goods by third parties in the UK can constitute genuine use of a UK registered trade mark.
A registered trade mark owner can rely on its registered trade marks to stop third parties from registering the same or similar marks, but only if the mark has been put to genuine use in the UK. In many cases, the third party will retaliate by challenging the validity of the trade mark (on the basis the mark has not been put to genuine use). If the challenge is successful, the Courts may order the trade mark to be revoked. This amounts to a ‘use it or lose it’ policy, which can cause difficulties for many brand owners. Continue Reading
States Are Proposing Their Own CCPA-Like Privacy Laws
Businesses that have just about come to terms with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) may have more privacy rules and regulations to deal with going forward. Legislators in a number of other states across the country have recently proposed their own privacy bills. In many instances, these bills are similar to the CCPA, but some would impose new and different requirements on businesses and, therefore, would compound their obligations and multiply their compliance difficulties. Continue Reading
Harry and Meghan’s trade mark problem – third party jumps on the bandwagon and applies to register same mark in the EU to cover “jewellery” and “beer”
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex submitted a trade mark application with the World Intellectual Property Office last year to register “SUSSEX ROYAL” in the UK, EU, Australia, Canada and the US. The application covers a range of goods and services in six classes, including printed publications; clothing; promotional and public awareness campaigns; volunteer projects for charitable purposes; education and training relating to nature, conservation and the environment; organising youth training schemes; counselling and emotional support services. Continue Reading
NEWS HIGHLIGHTS: IP&IT NOVELTIES IN RUSSIA OF 2019
THE GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AS THE NEW INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ITEM
According to the Federal Law “On the Introduction of Amendments to Part Four of the Civil code of the Russian Federation” that shall come into force on the 27th of June 2020, a new civil law institute – the geographical indication is appearing in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (herein after – the Civil Code). Continue Reading
Collective management of music authors’ rights in Greece: Recent developments in a long-suffering field
The field of collective management of music authors’ rights in Greece is currently experiencing a series of ongoing developments regarding the establishment and operation of collecting societies representing music authors in the country, with the situation still remaining uncertain as to how the landscape will look like in a few months’ time.
It is noted that currently, two Collective Management Organizations (CMOs) are representing music authors in Greece: “EYED” and “AUTODIA”. Continue Reading
What happens to EU trade marks after Brexit?
A mere three and a half years after the 2016 referendum on membership of the European Union, the UK looks set to “leave” the EU on 31 January 2020. Instead of exiting without a deal (which at one stage looked distinctly possible), the UK’s departure will be pursuant to the New Withdrawal Agreement. Under this deal – which is currently being enshrined into UK law – 31 January 2020 will mark the beginning of an 11 month transition period, with the true exit date currently set as 31 December 2020 (Exit Day). Continue Reading
