Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This law was replaced on March 6, 1903 by Act No. 666 or the Trademark and Trade Name Law of the Philippine Islands, which abandoned prior registration in favor of actual use of the mark as the basis for trademark rights. The Philippines, being then a territory of the United States, incorporated into Act 666 principles upon which the U.S ...
A cause of action for passing off is a form of intellectual property enforcement against the unauthorised use of the trade dress (the whole external appearance or look-and-feel of a product, including any marks or other indicia used) which is considered to be similar to that of another party's product, including any registered or unregistered trademarks.
The authority for this type of registration is set forth in the Lanham Act, which permits concurrent use registration where the concurrent use applicant made a good-faith adoption of the mark prior to the registrant filing an application for registration. Such registrations are most commonly achieved by agreement of the parties involved ...
The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines shortened as IPOPHL, is a government agency attached to the Department of Trade and Industry in charge of registration of intellectual property and conflict resolution of intellectual property rights in the Philippines.
In the United States, an Office action is a document written by an examiner in a patent or trademark examination procedure and mailed to an applicant [1] for a patent or trademark. The expression is used in many jurisdictions. Formally, the "O" is supposed to be capitalized, since it refers to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. [2]
Refusals cannot be based on formality requirements. Refusal by one contracting party is limited to its own territory and does not affect the international registration in other designated jurisdictions. [13] WIPO must be notified of any refusal within six (or twelve) months of the date of publication in the International Designs Bulletin.
Marks that cannot themselves be registered as trademarks but have achieved secondary meaning can still be protected from unfair competition; under the 1881 Act, circuit courts do not have jurisdiction over a dispute by two parties of the same state not involving a registrable trademark Clinton E. Worden & Co. v. California Fig Syrup Co.
An applicant who does not qualify under one of these headings cannot use the Hague system. The Contracting Parties include not only individual countries, but also intergovernmental organisations such as the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI) and the European Union. This means an applicant domiciled in an EU member country that is ...