Friday, April 5, 2024

Global Patent Filings Dip for the First Time in 14 Years | Lex Protector

 


For over a decade, global innovation has been on a steady rise, reflected in a consistent increase in patent filings. But a recent report by the United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) throws a curveball. For the first time in 14 years, international patent filings have declined. The report highlights a 1.8% drop in filings in 2023 compared to 2022, totaling 272,600 applications. This dip is attributed to two major factors: economic uncertainty and rising interest rates.

With inflation on the rise and a looming recession a concern, businesses are likely tightening their belts. Research and development (R&D), which often leads to patentable inventions, can be an expensive undertaking. In such a climate, companies might be more hesitant to invest in innovation.

Higher interest rates also play a role. Startups and smaller businesses, which are often at the forefront of innovation, may find it harder to secure funding for their projects due to the increased cost of borrowing.

However, the report also identifies a bright spot: India. While the global trend dipped, India bucked the trend and saw an increase in patent filings. This suggests that some countries might be prioritizing innovation even amidst economic challenges.

The decline in patent filings is a cause for concern. Innovation is a key driver of economic growth and development. A slowdown in innovation could lead to stagnation in various sectors. It remains to be seen whether this is a temporary blip or a long-term trend. The coming years will be crucial in determining the impact of the current economic climate on global innovation.

Blog Resource : https://lexprotector.com/blog/patent-filing-global-filings-dip-for-the-first-time/

Tuesday, March 12, 2024

Navigating the Legal Maze: AI, IP Rights, and the Quest for Clarity


Lately, a bunch of countries, like the USA and the UK, have made it clear that their local laws don’t really recognize the outputs of artificial intelligence (AI). Figuring out what exactly qualifies as ‘autonomous inventions’ versus ‘AI aided inventions’ is a bit of a head-scratcher, especially since there’s no official technical definition for it. With the advent of technology, AI can be used either as a tool to produce a creative output or it creates independent outputs through self-learning algorithms without any human intervention.

Now, when AI is merely used as a tool, it’s crucial to figure out how the extent of human link and intervention used to produce the given output on which IP rights are demanded. Just hitting a button or providing in a few basic instructions isn’t enough to give exclusive IP rights on the human author. It is important to determine such questions to ensure that the very purpose of IP rights is not defeated by conferring protection to humans on works where no creative effort, skill, or judgment has been used.


AI as a tool may give rise to legal ambiguity in terms of determining inventorship. IP law generally does not differentiate between ideas that arise solely from the inventor’s thoughts and those that are created through problem-solving methods and tools. For instance, if a painter uses a paint brush for creating a painting, he would not be denied copyright for the use of the brush as a tool.

But how is this justified? AI systems differ from humans in terms of their capacity and capability to process data. These are not merely tools, but ‘self-learning’ tools capable of producing original works. Thus, even the use of AI as a tool is problematic for determining authorship/ownership status owing to the jurisprudence of Creativity, Sweat & Brow, Labour, and Personality theories.

At the current state of technology, neither the jurisprudential theories of IP nor the level of ‘self-learning’ mechanisms of these systems justify IP rights. Given the current predictions of AI designers regarding the uncertain and distant arrival of Artificial General Intelligence, it seems more advantageous to shift focus towards more relevant matters concerning intellectual property (IP) law in relation to AI techniques. Plus, let’s take a good look at what role IP law is really playing in boosting AI innovation.

Blog Resource : https://lexprotector.com/blog/navigating-the-legal-maze-ai-ip-rights-and-the-quest-for-clarity/

Wednesday, January 3, 2024

Protection of Intellectual Property in China: The Power of Customs Registration

Protection of Intellectual Property in China: The Power of Customs Registration

In today's fast-paced global economy, intellectual property (IP) has become a vital asset for businesses worldwide. China, with its burgeoning market and complex legal landscape, presents both immense opportunities and potential challenges for IP protection. For rights holders navigating this terrain, Chinese Customs Registration emerges as a critical tool for safeguarding their valuable innovations and creations.

What is Chinese Customs Registration?

Chinese Customs Registration, also known as IPR Recordal with the General Administration of Customs (GAC), is a voluntary administrative procedure that empowers IP right holders to proactively inform the GAC of their legally protected IP rights, including trademarks, patents, and copyrights. This involves submitting detailed information about the IP, including its legal status, the relevant goods it relates to, and authorized uses. By doing so, IP holders equip the GAC with the knowledge and tools to actively seek out and detain infringing goods at the border during import and export.

Why is Chinese Customs Registration Important for IP Holders?

There are several compelling reasons why IP holders should consider Chinese Customs Registration:

  • Enhanced Detection of Infringing Goods By providing the GAC with detailed information about your IP, you effectively create a "watchlist" that customs officials can actively reference during border checks. This significantly increases the chances of identifying and intercepting counterfeit or pirated goods before they enter or leave the country, minimizing market saturation and potential damage to your brand reputation.

  • Strong Deterrent Effect: The mere presence of your IP on the GAC watchlist serves as a powerful deterrent to potential infringers. Knowing that their illegal activities will likely be intercepted at customs discourages them from attempting to import or export counterfeit goods in the first place. This proactive approach can significantly reduce your need for costly legal intervention and enforcement actions.

  • Streamlined Enforcement Process: When infringing goods are identified by customs, the detention process is swift and efficient. The GAC has the authority to detain suspect goods for up to 30 days while seeking confirmation of infringement from the IP right holder. This allows for timely resolution of infringement cases and minimizes the disruption to legitimate trade flows.

  • Reduced Enforcement Costs: Compared to litigation or private investigation, Chinese Customs Registration offers a cost-effective solution for IP protection. The registration process itself is relatively affordable, and the proactive detection and deterrence it fosters can dramatically reduce the need for subsequent enforcement actions.

Thursday, November 16, 2023

Empowering International Sellers: A Success Story on Amazon US

In the dynamic landscape of e-commerce, breaking into new markets poses significant challenges, especially for international sellers seeking a foothold on platforms like Amazon US. Yet, in just a fortnight, our firm showcased the power of expertise and dedication in assisting a South Korean client in realizing their aspirations of retailing lifestyle products in the vast expanse of the American market.

The journey began with a client eager to dive into Amazon US, understanding the pivotal need for trademark registration and additional protection against potential infringements and counterfeit products. Their vision was clear, but the logistical hurdle of lacking a domestic address in the US loomed large.

Undeterred by the complexities, our adept team embarked on a mission. We meticulously navigated the intricacies of the trademark application process within the United States, overcoming the challenge of their non-local presence. The successful culmination of this phase was a testament to our commitment and proficiency in delivering tailored solutions to our clients.



However, the achievement didn’t halt there. Within an impressive timeframe of just 5 days, our relentless efforts bore fruit as we swiftly facilitated the client’s enrollment in the Amazon Brand Registry program. This pivotal step fortified their brand’s standing and shielded them against potential threats within the competitive marketplace.

The moment arrived. With all the necessary checkboxes ticked, the client embarked on their Amazon US journey, introducing their meticulously crafted lifestyle products to a new audience. The initial apprehensions were swiftly replaced by confidence as the products made their way into the digital aisles of Amazon US.

Months passed, and the success story continued to unfold. The client’s experience has been nothing short of exemplary, characterized by a seamless retail journey devoid of issues, infringements, or encounters with counterfeit products. Their delight and satisfaction with our services found a heartfelt voice in a glowing review on Trustpilot, underscoring the trust and reliability fostered through our partnership.


This success story stands as a testament to the potential unlocked when expertise, dedication, and innovation converge. It echoes the possibilities for international sellers to thrive in competitive markets, underscoring the importance of strategic guidance and adept navigation of intricate processes for a successful retail expedition.

As we celebrate this milestone, it reinforces our commitment to empowering businesses worldwide, bridging gaps, and facilitating seamless transitions into new market frontiers. In an increasingly interconnected world, opportunities abound, and with the right support, ambitious visions can indeed turn into remarkable success stories.

For us, this accomplishment signifies not just a project done well but a partnership built on trust, collaboration, and the shared pursuit of excellence. As we continue on this journey, we remain committed to empowering businesses and individuals worldwide, one success story at a time.


Blog Resource : https://lexprotector.com/blog/empowering-international-sellers-a-success-story-on-amazon-us/

Tuesday, July 4, 2023

Naked Licensing: A Legal and Financial Minefield | Trademark Registration


Trademarks are source identifiers that distinguish one product or service from others in the marketplace. They are visual, auditory, or even tactile indicators that consumers can use to identify the source of a good or service. When a trademark is distinctive, it allows consumers to make informed purchasing decisions and to build trust with the brand. Wherein, Trademark licensing is a contractual arrangement that allows the licensor to authorize the licensee to use its trademark in connection with the sale of goods or services. The licensee is typically required to adhere to certain quality control standards to ensure that the trademark is used in a way that does not dilute its value.

Naked licensing occurs when a trademark owner fails to adequately control the use of its trademark by licensees. This can lead to dilution of the trademark's distinctiveness, as well as consumer confusion about the source of the goods or services. When the owner of the trademark grants permission or a license to the third party and when the misuses the mark or does not use that mark in a way that is appropriate or has been told to use in such cases, the issue of naked licensing arises. So basically, it refers to a situation where brand owners fail to adequately control the use of their trademarks by licensees. The naked license created confusion in the mind of the public about what is the source of the mark. So as a result, the mark loses its value.

While talking about the Dos, when entering into licensing agreements, brand owners should draft comprehensive contracts that clearly define the terms and conditions of the license. The agreement should outline the scope of a license, specify their permitted users, establish quality control requirements, and include provisions for termination or remedial actions in case of non-compliance. 

Neglecting to monitor licensees can result in unauthorized variations in brand usage or substandard product or service quality. Regular monitoring and open communication channels are vital to address any deviations or issues promptly.

Brand owners should actively monitor and audit the activities of their licensees to ensure ongoing compliance with quality control requirements. Regular monitoring can help identify deviations, address issues promptly, and maintain consistency in brand representation across different licensees. While talking about the Don’ts, Avoid entering into licensing agreements that lack clear provisions for quality control. Failing to include these provisions increases the risk of inadequate brand representation and potential dilution.

Neglecting to monitor licensees can result in unauthorized variations in brand usage or substandard product or service quality. Regular monitoring and open communication channels are vital to address any deviations or issues promptly.

Over-licensing occurs when a brand owner grants too many licenses, which can dilute the exclusivity and compromise quality control measures. It is important to carefully select licensees and maintain control over the number of licenses granted.

In the case of Coin Holdings Ltd. v. Trans Tyres (India) Pvt. Ltd.[1], the court held that the degree of control exercised by a licensor over its licensee is a critical factor in determining whether the licensing arrangement is valid. The court found that there are various dimensions in which control can be exercised or presumed, such as the right to inspect the licensee's methods and goods, the right to prescribe specifications and standards, and the right to terminate the license agreement. The court also found that the existing relationship between the licensor and the licensee can inherently imply the degree of control. For example, if the licensor is a well-known brand with a strong reputation, it is likely to have more control over the licensee than if it is a smaller, less well-known brand.

The court's decision in Coin Holdings is significant because it provides guidance to licensor and licensees on the degree of control that is necessary to ensure the validity of a licensing arrangement. The decision also highlights the importance of quality control in trademark licensing.

Legal Implications and Enforcement: Naked licensing can have legal ramifications, including potential trademark infringement claims. When a brand owner fails to maintain adequate quality control, it can result in the loss of trademark rights. To protect their brand, owners must be aware of the legal risks and enforce their rights by seeking remedies such as termination of the licensing agreement, seeking damages, or obtaining injunctions.

Naked licensing can have detrimental effects on a brand's reputation and distinctiveness. By adhering to the dos and don'ts of licensing, brand owners can protect their trademarks, maintain quality control, and preserve the integrity of their brands. This includes drafting clear licensing agreements, implementing effective quality control measures, and conducting regular monitoring. By prioritizing quality control and upholding brand standards, brand owners can ensure that licensed use of their trademarks enhances their reputation and adds value to their brand.

Blog Resource : https://lexprotector.com/blog/naked-licensing-a-legal-and-financial-minefield/

Thursday, December 29, 2022

CAN THE PACKAGING OF A PRODUCT BE TRADEMARKED?


Distinctive packaging to allure the consumer to purchase or even inspect goods in the market, has become sort of the newest trend. But some of these packaging revelations are not just trendy. They are unique in keeping traction of their audience. For starters, ever wondered how no other chocolate has packaging like that of the Toblerone chocolates? Its not for the lack of trying to copy the coolest new marketing strategy, but because the product’s shape or the product’s 3D packaging is protected by trademark law.

In India, Section 2(1)(m) of the Trademarks Act, 1999 defines a markas one which includes a brand, device, label, heading, name, signature, ticket, letter, numeral, word, packaging, the shape of goods, or combination of either colours or any other combination. The scope of this definition has been widened to include non-conventional trademarks like 3-Dimensional trademarks. A three-dimensional trademark is an unconventional trademark that makes use of a 3D (three-dimensional) shape of a product or its container or package to achieve a distinct position in the growing marketplace full of advertisements trying to embed themselves in the consumers’ minds. It is non-conventional in the sense that it does not comprise 2D (two-dimensional) elements of mere words, numerals, or figures.

On the other hand, the things that cannot be registered as a trademark in India has been provided under Section 9(3) of the Trademark Act. Considering the overlap of generic and descriptive values of a mark, there are three conditions under which a trademark would not be qualified for a 3D trademark registration:

  1. Where the shape of goods is resulting from the nature of the goods themselves.
  2. Where the shape of goods is such that it is necessary to obtain a technical result.
  3. Where the goods are given a substantial value due to their shape.

The fundamental purpose of this section is to prevent a situation creating a monopoly of the common shape of goods and ensure that such goods are free for public usage. The Contour of a Coca-Cola bottle, the 3D shape of the Super Cub Scooter of Honda, and the shape of the Zippo Lighter are some famous examples of acceptable 3D trademarks.

Section 2(1)(zg) gives the definition of a “well-known trademark”. According to this section, a well-known trademark is a mark (in relation to goods or services) that has become a considerable segment of the public which uses such goods or receives such services. The substantiality is judged by the fact that if another proprietor uses such mark in relation to their goods or services, then the public would be likely to take that mark as indicative of a connection in furtherance of trade or service, along with a person using the mark in relation to the first-mentioned goods or services.

For example, just assume Coco-Cola’s bottles are newly launched without any markings, in India. Coca-Cola packaging is in such a way that it is recognised by the shape of its glass bottle. If any other company makes a bottle of similar shape and consumers start identifying and relating it to Coca-Cola’s bottle, then in that situation Coca-Cola would feel the need to protect the bottle’s shape under trademark law and such a shape would come under the definition of a “well-known trademark,” as it qualifies the requirement of becoming a substantial segment of the public.

Under the trademark law, the trade dress encompasses the visual aspect of a product and it comprises several distinctive features with respect to the shape, size, packaging, colour combination, textures, graphics etc. Even though there is no separate provision which specifically deals with 'Trade Dress', in the Indian Trademark Act, 1999, it is offered protection under the common law of passing off which includes the aspect of packaging, shape of goods, colour combination etc. For the purposes of qualifying under the common law of passing off, the packaging and the design of the product should have some kind of inherent distinctiveness or the product could also have acquired a distinctive character from its presence in the market over a considerable amount of time.

The main objective behind providing protection to trade dress is to prevent the untrained eyes of the customers from getting deceived who might purchase the deceptively similar product with a similar packaging instead of the original product. Therefore, along with the fulfilment of requirements under Section 2(1)(zb), the Manual of Trademarks, Practice and Procedure of 2015 is there to aid the applicants which list down the requirements of graphical representation which have to be adhered to by the applicant in cases of unconventional trademarks. These are also applicable to other unconventional marks, including smell marks, sound marks, colour marks, etc as:

A trade mark must have the ability to be graphically represented for the purpose of registration.

A trade mark that has colours, shape, or packaging should be along with a concise and accurate description of the trade mark.

Such a description is required to be entered as an endorsement which would be taken along with the graphical representation and that will help to define the scope of the registration. It is also to be noted that the onus to provide a suitable representation of the trade mark is on the applicant.

Taking the Coca-Cola bottle’s shape example again, the graphical representation of shape should be in a form of perspective drawing, showing all features and should have an accurate description of the shape.

Above all, the elements in a product that can ensure a 3D packaging trademark protection are: Consumer recognition; Acquired distinctiveness; Goodwill; Extensive proof of usage; Higher burden of proof by applicant.

Blog Resource : https://lexprotector.com/blog/trademark-protection-for-product-packaging/

Tuesday, November 29, 2022

Unregistered Trademarks and their IP Protection

 


Introduction

Registration of a trademark under the Indian Trade Marks Act, 1999, is not mandatory. As a result, both registered and unregistered trademarks are defendable in India through a passing off or infringement lawsuit in a court of law.

India, a common law nation, upholds both codified law and common law principles, and as a result, it offers both infringements and passing off actions for trademark infringement. In India, rights to a trademark can be obtained by earlier adoption as well as through extensive, continuous, honest, legitimate, and uninterrupted use of the mark. Both passing off and trademark infringement are recognized under Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act.

What are Registered and Unregistered marks?

A trademark that has been registered under the Trademark Act of 1999 grants its owner exclusive rights. His ownership of such a trademark after registration becomes the initial piece of proof.

As we previously noted, the Act does not require that a trademark be registered, therefore unregistered trademarks are those that are not registered. However, compared to the legal protection provided to registered trademarks, the protection they receive is quite limited.

What is passing off?

Passing off is a common law tort, which can be used to enforce unregistered trademark rights. In the case of Perry v Truefitt (1842) for the first time the principle of passing off was introduced, i.e. “Nobody has the right to represent his goods as the goods of somebody else”.

Criteria for a passing off action

The primary purpose of India's passing off statute, which is actionable under common law, is to safeguard the goodwill associated with unregistered trademarks. The fundamental rule of law states that one should not profit from another person's labor. The following are the criteria for a passing-off action.

  • Reputation

It is crucial to prove in court that an unregistered trademark has a reputation in the market and can be easily differentiated under the class of goods, businesses, or services for which it is used. An unregistered trademark must have some goodwill and reputation in the market which means, people should recognize such a mark.

  • Prior user

Unregistered trademarks are given statutory protection under Sections 34 and 35 of the Trademark Act, 1999. These clauses essentially state that a prior user of a trademark will have priority over later users notwithstanding being registered in order to protect the interests of an unregistered trademark.

  • Misrepresentation

The party instituting an action against passing off needs to prove that such passing off by a third party has caused him actual damage in business and profit due to the misrepresentation.

Finding & Conclusion

An unregistered trademark owner has some rights and remedies according to the Trademark Act of 1999 and common law remedies, but it also puts a burden on him. The unregistered trademark owner may believe that taking legal action to prevent passing off provides adequate protection, but there are still requirements that must be completed. A trademark serves as a brand's and a product's identification. The rights derived from such a brand must be very carefully considered and understood. It is advised for such a person to register his trademark in order to take advantage of the range of rights offered by the Trademarks Act, of 1999.

Blog Resource : https://lexprotector.com/blog/unregistered-trademarks-and-ip-protection/