| Womble Bond Dickinson

The Hajdu Halloumi decision – collective marks as badges of origin

04 Dec 2020

As the UK prepares to depart from the EU, it will introduce shortly a national regime for the protection of geographical indicators. Against this background, it is interesting to read how the scope of registered collective marks was interpreted widely by the High Court so as to defeat a UK trade mark application that had incorporated the entirety of an earlier collective mark as only one of its elements. The decision demonstrates how, despite being subject to the general rules pertaining to trade marks, collective marks can be useful and powerful assets. It also serves as a reminder of the approach to be adopted when assessing the extent to be which collective marks might share visual, aural and/or conceptual similarity with other marks.

Court finds no 'classic' bait and switch selling where there is no confusion

20 Nov 2020

'Bait and switch' selling is the act of marketing certain goods, but then substituting alternative goods when such goods are supplied. At its broadest, it is any attempt to get customers to accept something different from what originally attracted them. Such acts may be restrained if they are deemed to constitute an actionable misrepresentation.

UK Intellectual Property Office announces requirement for UK address for service

20 Nov 2020

Applicants for UK trade marks, designs and patents will be required to appoint a UK address for service going forward, according to a recent announcement by the UK Government.

WBD leads on Trade Mark expertise for the Bloodhound world land speed record project

11 Nov 2020

The Intellectual Property team at WBD is assisting Grafton LSR Ltd, the company owning the Bloodhound land speed record project.

WBD's Intellectual Property practice nominated at the Yorkshire Legal Awards

27 Oct 2020

WBD has been shortlisted for the Intellectual Property (IP) award at this year's Yorkshire Legal Awards.

Spotlight thrown onto imaging orders – Court of Appeal issues warning shot

08 Oct 2020

With advances in forensic tools, it has become increasingly common for courts to grant imaging orders (in support of search orders) for the quick and comprehensive preservation of electronically stored data on hard drives, laptops, etc. An advantage of imaging orders is that they allow the search process to be far less intrusive and disruptive for the business/premises that are being searched. On the other hand, a disadvantage is that the imaging process does not discriminate between documents that pertain to the issues of the proceedings and are covered by the search orders from documents that are irrelevant and/or privileged.

Turbo-K 'cleans up' against Turbo-K International and its sole director

24 Sep 2020

Following the departure of two company directors, the remaining director has been found personally liable for the company's acts of passing off in using the name "Turbo-K", even though the director believed the company had permission from one of its ex-directors to use the name.

Court tells 'Nosecco' to leave it to the pro's

26 Aug 2020

The association responsible for protecting and promoting the use of the name 'Prosecco' – Consorzio di Tutela della Denominazione di Origine Controllata Prosecco (the "Consorzio") – has successfully opposed the registration in the UK of a stylised label containing the word NOSECCO (the "Sign") in class 32, for non-alcoholic wines and non-alcoholic sparkling wines.

Lack of inventive step: reading v appreciating

18 Aug 2020

Patents bestow upon their owners powerful monopolistic rights, entitling them to control the use of their inventions for a finite period. Although monopolies are generally regarded as being contrary to the public interest, an exception is made in the case of patents because there is perceived to be a 'bargain' whereby the grant of exclusivity is assumed to encourage the disclosure by patentees of their inventions, thereby adding to the pool of human knowledge such that the inventions will then become available for use by all at the expiry of the patent term (usually 20 years)[1].

Brexit and .eu domain names

12 Aug 2020

According to the legislative requirements[1], the following individuals and businesses are eligible to register .eu domain names:a n European Union ("EU") citizen, independently of their place of residence, a natural person who is not an EU citizen, but who is resident in an EU member state, an undertaking established in the EU; or an organisation that is established in the EU, without prejudice to the application of national law

Related insights: IP, Technology and Data

The Hajdu Halloumi decision – collective marks as badges of origin

Court finds no 'classic' bait and switch selling where there is no confusion

UK Intellectual Property Office announces requirement for UK address for service

WBD leads on Trade Mark expertise for the Bloodhound world land speed record project

WBD's Intellectual Property practice nominated at the Yorkshire Legal Awards

Spotlight thrown onto imaging orders – Court of Appeal issues warning shot

Turbo-K 'cleans up' against Turbo-K International and its sole director

Court tells 'Nosecco' to leave it to the pro's

Lack of inventive step: reading v appreciating

Brexit and .eu domain names

Insights

WBD Advance

Related insights: IP, Technology and Data

Insights

WBD Advance

Contact