http://www.takeip.jp/english/index.html
0日前 —
-・Additional Information on Specific Infringement Litigation Representation- +・IP Infringement Litigator
-March 25, 2024-Letters of Consent (LOC) Get Accepted in Japan-Will the Notorious Assign-Back be Gone or Go Underground?-Effective April 1, 2024, if your new* trademark application in Japan encounters objections based on prior identical or similar marks, you will no longer have to abandon it or go through that tricky process of Assign-Back as dubbed in Japanglish. This was made possible by recent amendments to our Trademark Act and will expand the range of possible measures to be taken where there are identical or similar marks in use, which you believe can coexist with yours in the market.-* Letters of Consent can only be accepted for your Japanese applications to be filed on or after April 1, 2024 or Japanese designations of international applications/registrations made thereafter under the Madrid System.-It is pertinent to note that Letters of Consent from the owners of prior marks are a necessary but not a sufficient condition for JPO examiners to grant coexistence of later marks in the Trademarks Register. In addition to the consent requirement, the newly added Section 4(4) of the Trademark Act requires that there be no likelihood of confusion between the goods/services for which the prior marks are registered and those for which the later mark is to be used**. -** This second requirement of no likelihood of confusion can be legally contentious, because the Japanese courts have consistently equated similarity with confusion. The only notable exception to this rule was dissimilar but confusing trademarks applicable under Section 4(1)(xv) of the Trademark Act.-According to the Examination Guidelines for Trademarks as revised in February 2024, in globally determining whether the non-confusion requirement has been met, the Examiner shall take into account the following facts and issues:-i) How similar is the later mark to the prior mark?-ii) How well-known is the prior mark?-iii) Does either of the marks include an invented word or -a salient feature in composition?-iv) Is either of the marks a house mark?-v) How diversified is the business of either party?-vi) How are the goods/services of either party related?-vii) How are the consumers of either partys goods/services,-common in scope?-viii) How are or will the marks be used in trade; how are or-will the goods/services be marketed?-Once your trademark application receives a relative-ground objection that is hard to overcome by way of arguments or by cancelling the registration of each cited prior mark for any reason, you can enter negotiations with the owner of the cited mark for a Letter of Consent or a more comprehensive coexistence agreement. In a case where marks are identical and used for identical goods or services, however, such an agreement between the parties would certainly not negate a likelihood of confusion.-In order to ensure that no likelihood of confusion will be confirmed by the Examiner, it will be essential to feed business-side information, i.e. facts on the ground, to the Examiner with regard to Items v) to viii). Such information is not limited to differences between both parties goods/services or in target consumers but should include a) how the applied-for mark is used in a reliably consistent way, b) how it is always shown vis-à-vis your company name or logo, c) how it is positioned in the product packages and d) whether it is accompanied by a disclaimer or other qualifying language to communicate to consumers that the goods/services should be distinguished from others in the market.-As implied in Item viii) above, the likelihood of confusion to be determined during examination concerns the situation not just in the present but in the future. This is where the specific terms and conditions of the LOC or coexistence agreement kick in, in particular those binding terms relating to measures to prevent confusion through mutual consultation. In this regard, any effective confusion preventive and relief measures, if set forth in the LOC or coexistence agreement in both general and specific terms, should work greatly in persuading the Examiner of no likelihood of confusion in the future.-Our hope is that JPO examiners will not impose the no-likelihood-of-confusion requirement too strictly; otherwise, the Assign-Back practice where the ownership of your important trademark goes back and forth between the consenting parties may well persist.-If you have any questions about this article or our services, please contact me at suzuki [at] takeip.jp or our trademark team at trademark [at] takeip.jp. - +May 15, 2024
- +Pablo Escobar, Zhang Wei or Shohei Ohtani?
- +registration requirements of consent
- +to personal names with clarity on identity
- +On April 1, 2024 the Japanese trademark office set about accepting Letters of Consent for coexistence of identical or similar trademarks in the Register. Another important change to Japans trademark act is in relaxing its absolute nature of refusal of trademarks containing full names (surnames and given names) of living individuals anywhere in the world.
- +Article 4(1)(viii) of the Trademark Act until March 31, 2024 read as follows:
- +Article 4(1) - Unregistrable Trademarks
- +Notwithstanding the preceding Article, no trademark may be registered if the trademark:
- +(viii) contains the portrait of another person, or the name, well-known pseudonym,
- +professional name or pen name of another person, or well-known abbreviation thereof
- +(except those the registration of which has been approved by the person concerned);
- +This ground for refusal is meant to protect individuals' right to control how their names are used. If your trademark includes the name of a living individual, it could only be registered with the written consent of that individual. The law did not stipulate that the name had to be one that identifies a particular individual. As it happens, I know many people with exactly the same full name as mine but would find it impractical to ask all of them to provide consent to registration of my name as a trademark.
- +The flaw was increasingly real and dire for the design industry, especially in the field of fashion, communication, interior and product design, where the names of creators and founders take the central role in communicating the appeals of their goods and services to consumers. In this age of search engines, applications for trademarks including the full names of such designers and founders would easily have been refused if no pains are taken to obtain a written consent from each and every person with the same names.
- +The revision to the Trademark Act has relaxed the consent requirement by a) limiting "the name of another person" in the above provisions to those well-known in the relevant field of goods and services for which the trademark is to be used while it seeks to avoid abuse by b) requiring that the name in the trademark be reasonably related to the applicant and that the application not be filed unfair purposes.
- +In effect, the amendment has made sure that only applications for trademarks containing full names of others that can really identify those particular living individuals would be objected to and that the required "reasonable relation" between the applicant and the name in the applied-for mark can be readily substantiated by showing that the applicant had continually used the mark prior to the filing, not to mention that the name is the applicant's own, its founder's or its important person's.
- +Following this welcome revision, this past April has seen quite a number of new applications filed for trademarks consisting solely of or featuring full personal names including: JAMES MARTIN, Fujita Den, Yun Bao, Yamada Juro, FRANCO ZILIANI, Kato Jin, VALORE MONTON, Monty Montgomery, Yamagishi Kazuo, KANAKO SAKAI, Tomoko Taguchi, Ryota Murakami, Diane Bonheur JAPONAIS, Valore Monton, Mihara Yasuhiro, Issei Higa, XINGFUDAO, Melady Brown, WILLIAM MORRIS and so forth both in kanji and Roman characters.
- +While we will see how these applications will be examined on a case-by-case basis, they all have much better prospects of registrability than before with no need to obtain consent from those who happen to have the same full names. So would applications for Zhang Wei (or David Smith, apparently the most common names in the world) or less common but by no means eccentric names like Shohei Ohtani (perhaps the most famous baseball player in the world) provided that the relaxed requirements a) and b) above were met.
- +Meanwhile, an application for Pablo Escobar, the name of the deceased king of cocaine if filed in Japan by Escobar Inc., a Puerto Rican company founded by his brother, would go unchecked by Article 4(1)(viii), not because it is filed for fair purposes but simply because Pablo Escobar is dead already. Such application would likely be rejected as a mark contrary to public policy under the preceding Article 4(1)(vii), an equivalent of Article 7(1)(f) EUTMR, although possibly a more notorious name AL CAPONE has in fact been registered in Class 34 in Japan.
...
https://www.amt-law.com/
0日前 —
- +齋藤宏一弁護士、清水亘弁護士、横井傑弁護士、金子涼一弁護士、藏野舞弁護士、長谷川達弁護士が執筆した記事「欧州コーポレート・サステナビリティ・デュー・ディリジェンス指令の採択」が商事法務ポータルに掲載されました。
- +岡崎真弓弁護士が株式会社東京海上日動パートナーズTOKIO/アララ株式会社共催のWebセミナーにおいて「不祥事対応・危機管理の基本と類型別ポイント ～サステナビリティ経営時代における危機管理の実務～「職場における人権侵害事案」」と題する講演を行いました。
- +ニュースレター【経済安全保障・通商】「欧州コーポレート・サステナビリティ・デュー・ディリジェンス指令の採択」が掲載されました。
-ニュースレター【コーポレート】「株式報酬に係るインサイダー取引規制に関する最近の動向-—インサイダー取引規制に関するQ&Aの追加—」が掲載されました。-西山洋祐弁護士セミナーのお知らせ「 メキシコ法務の最新動向「総論編」 ーメキシコ案件を担当するにあたり知っておきたいことー」2024年6月14日-(金))-青柳良則弁護士が執筆した論文「Shareholders' rights in private and public companies in Japan: overview」がThomson Reuters Practical Lawに掲載されました。- +齋藤宏一弁護士、清水亘弁護士、横井傑弁護士、金子涼一弁護士、藏野舞弁護士、長谷川達弁護士が執筆した記事「欧州コーポレート・サステナビリティ・デュー・ディリジェンス指令の採択」が商事法務ポータルに掲載されました。
-井上乾介弁護士、佐々木公樹弁護士、長谷川達弁護士が執筆した記事「クレジットカード・セキュリティガイドライン」の改訂およびクレジットカード・セキュリティ官民対策会議の設置」が商事法務ポータルに掲載されました。
...
http://www.sy-pat.com/price.html
0日前 —
- +
- +This webpage was generated by the domain owner using Sedo Domain Parking. Disclaimer: Sedo maintains no relationship with third party advertisers. Reference to any specific service or trade mark is not controlled by Sedo nor does it constitute or imply its association, endorsement or recommendation.
...
https://www.fukamipat.gr.jp/books/
0日前 —
-パテント誌 2024年2月号-執筆雑誌-知財管理 2023年12月号- +パテント誌 2024年5月号
-知財管理 2023年7月号-- +パテント誌 2024年2月号
- +執筆書籍
- +知的財産関係条約 第2版
- +
-パテント誌 2023年5月号- +PATENTS & LICENSING June 2023
-パテント誌 2022年10月号- +PATENTS & LICENSING October 2022
https://www.amt-law.com/services/practices/corporate
0日前 —
- +欧州コーポレート・サステナビリティ・デュー・ディリジェンス指令の採択
-株主総会招集通知完全理解のための計算書類・監査報告の基礎知識(5)～監査役等の監査報告～-2024年5月28日ほか外部主催-第 5374 回 表明保証保険を利用する場合の株式譲渡契約の実務上の留意点～条項案の紹介～-- +【満席により緊急増設!】M&A即戦力育成講座(2024年夏期)～講師による徹底した課題ワーク個別指導でM&Aの総合力をアップ(全6回)【ハイブリット開催】
- +2024年5月17日外部主催
...
http://www.harakenzo.com/jpn/more/
0日前 —
-東京本部-〒105-5129-東京都港区浜松町2-4-1 -世界貿易センタービルディング南館29階-TEL:03-3433-5810(代)-e-mail:- +Standard Essential Patent標準必須特許(SEP)サポート専門サイト
...