Recently, Beijing First Intermediate People's Court has
accepted an administrative lawsuit lodged by LOUIS VUITTON
MALLETIER (the "Plaintiff"), against the
China Trademark Review and Adjudication Board
("TRAB") with respect to its decision
regarding the trademark "LV and
"Mark") applied for by a local private
company of "eyeglass chains, etc." in Class 9.
The TRAB held that the evidence provided by the Plaintiff is not
sufficient to prove that its "LV" mark had become
well-known before August 21, 2002, i.e. the application date of the
Mark, and that the designated goods are not closely related to each
other in function, usage, sales channels and target consumers.
Further, the Mark does not belong to a party found to be
detrimental to socialist morals or customs, or having other
unhealthy influences as stipulated by Article 10.1(8) of the
PRC Trademark Law, which would prevent the registration of
Dissatisfied with the TRAB's decision, the Plaintiff filed
an appeal to the court, which is currently still pending.
LV mark of the plaintiff
Reg. No.: 241081
App. Date: Feb. 18, 1985
Goods: Travelling bags, etc.
Mark in dispute
App. No.: 3281104
App. Date: August 21, 2002
Goods: Eyeglass chains, etc.
This article enunciates the recent, much awaited, and landmark judgment delivered on September 16, 2016 by Hon'ble Delhi High Court throwing light on the important provisions of the Copyright Act, 1962.
Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion recently issued an office memorandum pursuant to receiving representations from various stakeholders for guidance with respect to the applicability of the provisions of Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957.
An Invention Disclosure Form is the documentation of the invention. This is a means to document particulars of your invention and submitting it to the patent attorney who is filing your patent application.
The Patents Act 1970, along with the Patents Rules 1972, came into force on 20th April 1972, replacing the Indian Patents and Designs Act 1911. The Patents Act was largely based on the recommendations of the Ayyangar Committee Report headed by Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar. One of the recommendations was the allowance of only process patents with regard to inventions relating to drugs, medicines, food and chemicals.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).