Public interest law groups have taken note and are collaborating to provide legal resources to help small entities deal with trademark complaints. For example, the www. In return, Chilling Effects "will respond by linking the legalese in the letters to FAQs that explain the allegations in plain English.
It is unclear whether trademark owners have in fact become more aggressive in asserting their rights or whether it is simply the case that more attention has been drawn to the issue as a result of social media sites and online initiatives such as the Chilling Effects website. In either case, the internet has provided purported infringers with a new tool for resisting allegations made against them.
It is therefore a good idea to keep the following in mind. Positions taken by trademark counsel have the potential to reflect directly on the trademark owner. Of course, it bears mentioning that while websites such as Chilling Effects can be a useful resource, they cannot substitute for the advice of qualified trademark counsel. The preceding is intended as a timely update on Canadian intellectual property and technology law.
The content is informational only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. By shifting the disparity in bargaining power, many individuals and smaller entities have been able to successfully overcome meritless infringement claims by convincing the public that the larger brutish corporation defied social standards.
Although the cost of shaming is relatively nominal and the effects may result in long-term stigmatization, it is important to recognize that trademark owners generate commercial success through goodwill and a positive rapport with the general public.
Therefore, these retaliatory measures may adversely affect a business because one of the most critical aspects of building a brand is the underlying reputation associated with the mark. Addressing this caveat, an overzealous shaming campaign may have significant deleterious commercial consequences by inadvertently exposing the victim as the bully. Roxana advances and protects interests of clients across a range of industries.
She advises clients on all aspects of intellectual property and business issues, with particular emphasis on trademark and copyright prosecution, clearance searches, opposition and cancellation proceedings, licensing, and various business-related agreements. You can contact Roxana through e-mail. He concentrates on trademark clearance and prosecution, trademark enforcement, copyright, peer-to-peer file sharing, and domain name and Internet related issues.
Read more. Having recently strayed too close to the incredibly lengthy leash restraining? Duke University ranked as the 2 trademark bully on a recent list , the record of their actions with the USPTO demonstrates an apparent belief that any mark featuring not just the name Duke, but a description or drawing of a devil, the letter D no matter how stylized , and even the color blue, somehow infringes on their mark. View More…. Advertise Here. Our website uses cookies to provide you with a better experience.
Read our privacy policy for more information. Accept and Close. Thus, Apple contended that the pear-shaped logo would create confusion in the minds of the public consumers. Prepear filed a counter-petition stating that Apple has continuously engaged in such behavior of opposing any fruit-based logos of small businesses.
Eventually, these businesses were forced to abandon their logos. The petition also stated the monetary losses incurred by Prepear as a result of litigation. Although This case is yet to be decided, on analysis, it is evident that the logos of pear and apple are not similar. The colors of the logos are completely different.
Further, they relate to distinctive fruits. Jones Investment Co Inc vs. The appellants opposed the trademark application of the defendants, and the registrar dismissed their notice of opposition.
Thus the appellants chose to appeal, giving rise to the present case. Importance of this case— protecting Indian manufacturers, In this case, the courts went in favor of the respondents as the appellant multinational company failed to demonstrate that they had acquired trans-border reputation and that they were in fact the first users of the market [16]. Bata India Limited Vs. Vitaflex Mauch Gmbh [17] — Vitaflex had issued a legal notice to Bata alleging trademark infringement of their five pressure point shoe design.
The plaintiffs filed a suit of trademark bullying against the defendants for restraining the defendant from issuing legal proceedings relating to the disputed trademark. According to the plaintiffs, the threats were baseless and unjustified. They sought a declaration stating the same. Moreover, to successfully enforce an alleged trademark infringement proceeding, the defendant must demonstrate the existence of a valid IP right concerning the pressure point design.
In this case, Vitaflex was unable to present any evidence to support their allegations of trademark infringement. Further, Bata contended that the five pressure points could not be registered as a trademark as it constitutes a functional aspect of the shoes. The Delhi court favored Bata and stated that the threats of Vitaflex were unreasonable and wrongful.
Thus vitaflex was restrained from issuing any further legal threats. The significance of this case is that an individual must ensure that the IP rights they are claiming have been infringed are valid to begin as well.
0コメント