intellectual property

Omegatiming is only for Omega. But what about megatiming?

Sometimes after receiving a cease-and-desist letter, or during the course of litigation, an infringer will replace its disputed name with a new, modified name. But often such changes are unsatisfactory for the plaintiff and are also challenged. Are the defendant’s prior actions and the designations previously used by the defendant relevant to evaluation of the new, modified designation? How to assess a situation where the defendant modifies its name while attempting to maintain continuity with the one it previously used?

Tic-Tac prevails in dispute over MIK MAKI dragee container

In a judgment of 6 March 2019, the Court of Justice of the European Union gave its final ruling on a case surrounding invalidation of a community design presenting the box for MIK MAKI dragees. The invalidation was being sought by Ferrero SpA, claiming infringement of its registered figurative mark for Tic-Tac packaging.

Specifying the type of trademark in a registration filing has far-reaching consequences

It has now been more than 18 years since Enercon GmbH, a manufacturer of wind turbines, applied to register a colour trademark with the EUIPO consisting of a pillar with stripes in varying shades of green and white. The ECJ issued a definitive judgment on the extent of the protection granted.

No supplementary protection for a new form of an active substance

In a judgment of 21 March 2019 (C-443/17) the CJEU reiterated the need for a precise and concise interpretation of the term “protected product” under Regulation (EC) 469/2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products. The CJEU stressed that this term only applies to an active ingredient of a medicinal product, and not combination with other substances that do not have an independent therapeutic effect.

Changes to trademark law from 16 March 2019

An amendment to the Industrial Property Law took effect on 16 March 2019, transposing into Polish law the Trademark Directive (2015/2436). The amendment is not revolutionary but will certainly have huge practical implications.

Abolition of the graphical presentation requirement for national trademarks

One of the changes in the amendment of the Industrial Property Law is that there will no longer be a graphical presentation requirement for trademarks. From 16 March 2019, it is possible for trademarks to be presented in any form using generally available technology, provided that they are presented in a clear, precise, independent, understandable, durable, objective, and easily accessible manner.