Company trademark

MOSCOW, August 2 RAPSI) – The Russian Intellectual Property Court (Intellectual Property Court) has returned Google’s lawsuit against Intra Service Company to seek early termination of its trademark due to its non-use, according to court records.

The request was returned to the US company due to poor execution.

The American company requested the deletion of the mark “Intra services company”, in which the last two words were unprotected elements, relating to services including advertising and commercial management, as well as scientific and technological services.

In May 2012, the Russian Federal Intellectual Property Service (Rospatent) registered this trademark as the property of Intra Service Company LLC. However, Google subsidiary Jigsaw launched the Intra app in October 2018.

The court suspended the request until June 16 due to irregularities in the documents.

As the court noted, Google failed to attach certain documents to its request, including those confirming the facts on which the American company is basing its claims, and those confirming the payment of state tax.

Intra Service Company carries out a set of repair and maintenance work of equipment and pipelines in the enterprises of the fuel and energy complex. The company is the only Russian entity to provide a full range of repair services without stopping the production of enterprises.

PARIS (AP) – Can a company own the word planet?

Powerful French entertainment company Canal Plus has registered the term in France, but environmental groups are opposed, saying they should be allowed to use the word “planet” to promote their plans to save it. Several files are being examined by the INPI, the French regulator of intellectual property, including one which is concluded this week.

Canal Plus argues that the group’s use of the terms “planete” in French, or “planet” in English, for marketing purposes violates its trademarks to protect its Planete TV channels which broadcast documentaries on nature.

The boss of the environmental group Planete Amazone, Gert-Peter Bruch, thought it was a hoax when he first received a letter from Canal Plus claiming ownership of the planet brand.

The group plans to release a documentary in February about the destruction of the Amazon rainforest and the activists’ fight to try to prevent it. Bruch attempted to register a trademark for his band’s name prior to the release of the film, which is called “Terra Libre” and was made largely by volunteers.

“Honestly, I thought it was a fake at first. I received an email from Canal Plus and I did not dare to open the attachment because I thought it was a virus. So I called them to ask if their legal department had tried to contact me, they said yes, ”Bruch told The Associated Press.

“I read the letter with amazement,” he said. “They were saying, ‘You don’t have the right to protect this brand (Planete Amazone), we are against it.'”

Laure Ansart’s group was faced with the same problem: a letter from the Canal Plus group denying them the right to use the word planet for their NGO, called Run for Planet – 15 Million Trees for Siberia.

The group is organizing a race from Montreuil-sur-Mer in France to Vladivostok on the Pacific coast of Russia in 2022 to raise awareness about Siberian forests, and wants to plant 15 million trees in the region. “Siberia is the green lung of the northern hemisphere, with the taiga and its cold forests which are essential for our oxygen, for the atmosphere of the entire planet,” she told the AP.

Bruch’s group is trying to reach an agreement with Canal Plus and has until Wednesday to submit documents to the intellectual property authority in order to avoid legal action. The Ansart group is awaiting a decision from the authority early next year on whether it can register its trademark under the word planet. Other groups are following similar procedures in an attempt to persuade Canal Plus to drop its opposition to their use of the word.

The Canal Plus group includes a cable network with several channels and a film and television studio that has produced or co-produced films including Basic Instinct, The Pianist, Green Zone and the Bridget Jones series.

The French National Institute of Intellectual Property, INPI, said it could not comment on the proceedings because they are confidential until a decision is made.

Canal Plus declined requests for comment. In letters to NGOs consulted by AP, the company listed several past decisions of the INPI defending the company’s Planet brands, involving groups with various missions including Miss Planete, Planete Macho or Planet Money Services.

In its letters, Canal Plus argues that its planets brands “enjoy a strong reputation on the French and European markets, and therefore represent a strong distinctive character to designate a television channel and the products and services connected to it”.

In the Planete Amazone case, the company maintains that the NGO offers services similar to the Canal Plus Planete channel, and the public might mistakenly believe that the NGO is connected to Canal Plus. Bruch disputes this and argues that the network and its environmental group should be allowed to coexist, both using the same word.

___

Angela Charlton in Paris contributed.

Can a company own the word planet?

Powerful French entertainment company Canal Plus has registered the term in France, but environmental groups are opposed, saying they should be allowed to use the word “planet” to promote their plans to save it. Several files are being examined by the INPI, the French regulator of intellectual property, including one which is concluded this week.

Canal Plus maintains that the group’s use of the terms “planet” in French, or “planet” in English, for marketing purposes violates its trademarks to protect its Planete TV channels which broadcast documentaries on nature.

The boss of the environmental group Planete Amazone, Gert-Peter Bruch, thought it was a hoax when he first received a letter from Canal Plus claiming ownership of the planet brand.

The group plans to release a documentary in February about the destruction of the Amazon rainforest and the activists’ fight to try to prevent it. Bruch attempted to register a trademark for his band’s name prior to the release of the film, which is called “Terra Libre” and was made largely by volunteers.

“Honestly, I thought it was a fake at first. I received an email from Canal Plus and I did not dare to open the attachment because I thought it was a virus. So I called them to ask if their legal department had tried to contact me, they said yes, ”Bruch told The Associated Press.

“I read the letter with amazement,” he said. “They were saying, ‘You don’t have the right to protect this mark (Amazon Planet), we are against it.'”

Laure Ansart’s group was faced with the same problem: a letter from the Canal Plus group denying them the right to use the word planet for their NGO, Run for Planet – 15 Million Trees for Siberia.

The group is organizing a race from Montreuil-sur-Mer in France to Vladivostok on the Pacific coast of Russia in 2022 to raise awareness about Siberian forests, and wants to plant 15 million trees in the region. “Siberia is the green lung of the northern hemisphere, with the taiga and its cold forests which are essential for our oxygen, for the atmosphere of the entire planet,” she told the AP.

Bruch’s group is trying to strike a deal with Canal Plus, and has until Wednesday to submit material to the intellectual property authority to avoid legal action. The Ansart group is awaiting a decision from the authority early next year on whether it can register its trademark under the word planet. Other groups are following similar procedures in an attempt to persuade Canal Plus to drop its opposition to their use of the word.

The Canal Plus group includes a cable network with several channels and a film and television studio that has produced or co-produced films including Basic Instinct, The Pianist, Green Zone and the Bridget Jones series.

The French National Institute of Intellectual Property, INPI, said it could not comment on the proceedings because they are confidential until a decision is made.

Canal Plus declined requests for comment. In letters to NGOs consulted by AP, the company listed several past decisions of the INPI defending the company’s Planet brands, involving groups with various missions including Miss Planete, Planete Macho or Planet Money Services.

In its letters, Canal Plus argues that its planets brands “enjoy a strong reputation on the French and European markets, and therefore represent a strong distinctive character to designate a television channel and the products and services connected to it”.

In the Planete Amazone case, the company maintains that the NGO offers services similar to the Canal Plus Planete channel, and the public might mistakenly believe that the NGO is connected to Canal Plus. Bruch disputes this and argues that the network and its environmental group should be allowed to coexist, both using the same word.

___

Angela Charlton in Paris contributed.

He is arguably the best F1 driver of all time and he will soon be Sir Lewis Hamilton, but even he surely cannot do what he wants all the time. The Mercedes F1 driver lost a three-year legal battle with Hamilton Watch Company over the Hamilton brand on watches in Europe.

Now if you know your watches, you know Hamilton, a brand that made and sold watches before Lewis was born. Founded in 1892, Hamilton predates Lewis’s father, Anthony by decades.

An American brand now part of the giant Swatch Group, Hamilton is best known for its khaki field watches. For those who don’t like watches, Elvis Presley wore Hamilton, and the ana-digi watch you saw in the movie. Principle this year is by them. In short, they are legitimate and have been for a long time.

So here is what it is. According to Daily mail, Lewis Hamilton’s 44IP company claimed that the trademark of the watch brand was filed in “bad faith”. 44IP attempted to file the name “Lewis Hamilton” for a range of products, including smartwatches, jewelry and, yes, watches. But watchmaker Hamilton challenged the movement, which makes sense. LH then fought his corner.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) has now ruled that the watch brand has the right to continue doing what it has been doing for over a century. “Racing driver Lewis Hamilton’s intellectual property rights argument fails. There is no “natural right” for a person to have their own name registered as a trademark, which would violate the rights of third parties, “the mainland’s intellectual property authority said in a statement. .

EUIPO rightly pointed out that the watchmaker had used the name Hamilton since 1892, and that it was “before the date of birth of ‘Lewis Hamilton’ as a natural person”. Quite simple, sorry Lewis, and long live the surveillance on the ground!

Electric Coin Company (ECC) donated the Zcash brand to the Zcash Foundation. ECC created and launched the privacy-focused cryptocurrency Zcash (ZEC) in 2016, and will now own the brand bilaterally with the corresponding foundation.

ECC and Zcash Foundation have been in negotiations since August

After an agreement signed on November 6, the Zcash Foundation will be financially responsible for the costs associated with the transfer and protection of the brand.

In announcing the news, the Zcash Foundation mentioned the existing disagreement with ECC over the brand’s future. The foundation said it had resumed negotiations with the ECC after failing to reach an agreement in late August 2019, during the Zcash community forum.

ECC logged over 500 hours and spent $ 250,000 for the brand

ECC explained that the brand agreement is important because it protects reputation and separates one product from another. The company said that Zcash’s trademark protects the community from scams and gives legal power to the governance of Zcash’s blockchain.

According to ECC, the donation allows them to solve two fundamental problems: honoring and supporting the comments of the Zcash community, and further decentralizing the organization. The Zcash Foundation noted that the agreement maintains interoperability with standard legal and business frameworks.

Cointelegraph reported in October a potentially malicious counterfeit version of the Zcash Foundation’s native ZecWallet. The agreement between the ECC and the Zcash Foundation demonstrates their commitment to preventing such cases.

Zara can sometimes sell safari-friendly items – from lightweight utility-inspired jackets to earth-toned jumpsuits, but consumers are highly unlikely to mistake the brand for a Tanzania-based travel agency, right. ? This is not what a European Union court recently ruled in a decision rejecting a trademark application filed by Zara Tanzania Adventures for a figurative mark, which includes the word “Zara” with “Tanzania Adventures “for use in connection with” travel and tourism “. services ”,“ education and training services on wildlife, ecology, safaris ”and“ travel agency and hotel services ”.

According to the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”), whose decision follows damage suffered by the travel agency before the European Union Office for Intellectual Property (“EUIPO”) and to an appeal before the CJEU, the brand of Zara Tanzania Adventures – which it uses in classes 39 (travel and tourism services), 41 (wildlife education and training services, ecology, safaris) and 43 (travel agency and hotel services) – is just too similar to those owned by the Spanish retail giant, and therefore cannot be registered with EUIPO.

The categories of products and services that Zainab and Roger Ansell listed on their 10-year-old registration application are important. After all, trademarks – that is, all words, names, symbols or designs, or any combination thereof, used in commerce to identify and distinguish the products of one business from another – are recorded by the classes of goods and services on which they are actually used. Class 25 covers, for example, clothing, while Class 3 includes various cosmetic products.

It is well established that two companies with very similar trademarks – that is, any word, name, symbol or design, or any combination thereof, used in commerce to identify and distinguish products from ‘another firm – and very similar product categories cannot both retain trademark registrations (as opposed to common law rights). At the same time, two companies using similar marks can enjoy the benefits of registration if the types of goods and services for which they use the marks differ.

This is why, for example, an airline, a valve company and a Swiss watch company all maintain registrations for the “Delta” brand.

With that in mind, the CJEU’s decision to dismiss Ansell’s claim – which largely depended on the argument from Zara’s parent company, Inditex, that fashion and travel aren’t that different – is striking. . The clothing giant has argued that it’s not uncommon for fashion publications, as well as influencers, to marry fashion and travel trends. Coupled with “the current trend of fashion brands moving into new adjacent markets, such as food, travel, hotels and restaurants”, it is possible that Zara is subject to consumer confusion and / or a unfair competition if the Ansell trademark were registered.

Zara’s victory “demonstrates the scalable and far-reaching nature of fashion brands and the markets in which they can operate and thrive,” according to Simon Casinader and Daniel Cartmell of K&L Gates. “The court held that, in accordance with the current trend of fashion brands moving to other markets, the risk of undue advantage cannot be ruled out despite the differences between products and services, and underlined the importance of take into account all the factors relevant to the circumstances of the case in order to determine the risk.

While the travel company may have lost the trademark battle in the EU, the company is embroiled in a battle in the United States after filing for the same trademark with the US Patent and Patent Office. Trademarks (USPTO “) in March 2018. Zara opposed the application in January and the parties are currently back and forth before the USPTO Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

“Considering that this court is of the prima facie opinion that this is a dishonest adoption by the defendant (Kent RO). The Defendant is hereby barred from using the Plaintiff’s Trademark (Mankastu Impex Private Limited) “HEPA PURE” or any other mark deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s Trademark until the next hearing date ”, stated Judge JR Midha. The court has now settled the case at a new hearing on January 10.

In an infringement action filed by Mankastu Impex Private Limited against Kent RO Systems Ltd in the High Court for infringement of its “HEPA Pure” mark, it sought an injunction to prevent Kent RO from using the mark with immediate effect. Mankastu Impex Private Limited is the manufacturer, trademark and patent owner of Atlanta Healthcare air purifiers,

Kent RO argued that “HEPA” is a technology and that many entities use the word “HEPA Technology”. He argued that the plaintiff cannot prevent the defendant from using “HEPA”. Counsel for Kent Ro argued that there are 13 entities that manufacture / market air purifiers in India and all of them use the word “HEPA Technology” because “HEPA” is a technology. She added that many entities use the word “Pure”.

According to Mankastu, “HEPA Pure” is a registered trademark under the legal entity of Atlanta Healthcare and it has used it for years to promote its air purifiers. Kent RO has adopted the same keywords and used the same ones on their air purifier products, advertisements, logo and other marketing materials.

The owners of a local liquor company want to honor their Nova Scotia hometown with their products. A trademark dispute with a European commercial group complicates the task.

Jesse Sommer poured years of hopes and dreams into four wooden barrels stored inside the Albany Distilling Company.

“We will be producing a few thousand bottles in 2021, 2022, 2023 and beyond,” said Sommer, co-owner of New Scotch Spirits.

He started the liquor company with his friend and compatriot Patrick Carey, originally from Nova Scotia, in 2016.

“I am a Nova Scotian. I grew up here. I am proud of the city, ”Sommer said.

The namesake of his company is the source of his problems. The Scotch Whiskey Association is taking legal action against them for the names of two of their “Auld Lang Syne” and “New Scotch” whiskeys.

“I don’t know what you would call it otherwise. It’s from Nova Scotia, so it’s New Scotch whiskey, it’s New Scotch vodka, it’s New Scotch bourbon, ”Sommer said.

Lawyers for the European trade organization say they are tricking consumers into selling genuine Scotch whiskey which by definition can only be produced in Scotland.

“I don’t want people to think we’re Scottish. I want them to see us as an American spirit with a Nova Scotia soul, ”Sommer said.

Their liquor is made and stored at the Albany Distilling Company. Owner and distiller John Curtin lives in Nova Scotia while Sommer, an army judge advocate, is stationed in Florida – Curtin oversees production.

“It’s really good to bring a good sense of belonging to a wonderful community like Nova Scotia,” said Curtin.

Grains, barley, wheat and rye are all locally sourced. Rebecca Miller of Lime Kiln Farm, a childhood friend of Sommer, hopes the spirits give her a familiar reminder.

“We want everyone to feel at home; like it’s a homecoming drink and it should be for every celebration, ”Miller said.

Sommer says he is ready to stand trial but hopes a compromise can be found with the Scottish Whiskey Association. Whatever the outcome, Sommer says he’s sure his spirits will hit the market.

Spectrum News has contacted the Scotch Whiskey Association for comment and received a response on Thursday.

“We do appreciate that ‘Scotland’ is used as a place name in other parts of the world, but when the words ‘Scotland’ or ‘Scotch’ are used on a whiskey, consumers will think of whiskey produced in Scotland and not the same. New York State. To give another example, even though there is a place in Cyprus called Aiya Napa, I’m sure you would agree that if ‘Napa’ was used on a wine people would assume it’s Californian, ”Lindesay Low said. , deputy director of the legal department. .

She went on to say, “We have a duty to prevent the infringement of intellectual property attached to Scotch Whiskey, regardless of the extent of the infringement. It is also important to remember that New Scotch has filed an application to register federal trademarks which, if granted, will give them exclusive rights in those terms across the United States.

NAZARETH, Pennsylvania., Oct. 26, 2016 / PRNewswire / – CF Martin & Co., Inc. (Martin Guitar) located at Nazareth, Pennsylvania is proud to announce that it has regained the rightful ownership of three of its legendary brands in China.

“I look forward to the opportunity to legitimately market the Martin Guitar brand in a very enthusiastic market,” said the CEO and Chairman of the Board. Chris Martin IV.

For over 180 years, Martin Guitar has been recognized internationally for producing the highest quality acoustic guitars and strings on the market. The iconic Martin Dreadnought guitar model, which turns 100^e anniversary this year, is one of the most influential and reproduced instrument designs in the world. Manufactured at Martin Headquarters in Nazareth, Pennsylvania and in Navajoa, Mexico, guitars and strings are revered by musicians around the world for their first-rate craftsmanship.

Martin Guitar has worked diligently to ensure that only guitars and strings made by Martin bear the brand’s distinctive designs. By obtaining the registrations of its three key brands in China, Martin will be able to significantly prevent counterfeit Martin products from entering the market.

“I think it is extremely important to note that we have recovered our trademarks in the PRC only through the processes offered to us in Chinese government administrative agencies and Chinese courts,” said Greg paul, Chief Technology Officer. “In short, even though it took a while, the Chinese legal system is finally right. This is not the story that people are used to hearing about. China and intellectual property. “

About Martin Guitar & Martin Strings

CF Martin & Cie. ® (www.martinguitar.com) has been creating the best instruments in the world for 183 years. It continues to innovate, introducing techniques and features that have become industry standards including X-bracing, 14-fret guitar, and “Dreadnought” size. One of the world’s leading manufacturers of acoustic instruments, Martin guitars are handcrafted by skilled craftsmen, who use a combination of new designs and techniques, as well as those introduced by the company’s founder.

The company is also known for producing popular high quality acoustic guitar strings and has been manufacturing its own strings since 1970. These include the successful Martin SP® Lifespan®, the fastest growing long-life string in industry, the exciting new Retro Strings Line played and appreciated by Tony Rice and Laurence Juber and the Martin SP Acoustic and SP Flexible Core ranges, which use a state-of-the-art lead wire to better retain chords.

Martin Guitars and Martin Strings are the instruments and strings of choice for musicians around the world, from rock, pop, country, folk and bluegrass icons to those just starting out in their careers. They can be seen in all segments of pop culture, from TV to movies, Broadway, books, online and covering popular magazines on newsstands around the world. Connect with Martin and Martin Strings on Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and YouTube and via www.martinguitar.com and www.martinstrings.com.

Logo – http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20151228/318223LOGO

THE SOURCE CF Martin & Co., Inc.

Related links

http://www.martinguitar.com