Archive for the ‘Foreign Protection’ Category
« Older Entries |Is There a Trademark Enforcement App For That?
Wednesday, October 13th, 2010
News today that Apple is about to obtain a US trademark registration for “THERE’S AN APP FOR THAT”.
Filed in 2009, Apple’s initial application covered both wares and services. However, following a recent division and filing of evidence of use, the USPTO approved the registration of the mark for use in association with retail store services and various online services, including app recommendations. Additional claims pertaining to various wares and to telecommunication services remain in the divided parent application, and Apple has obtained an extension of time to file use information on those points. (In Canada, Apple filed an application for “THERE’S AN APP FOR THAT” this past May; it remains pending with CIPO.)
With a registration nearly in hand, it is unclear is whether Apple plans a campaign to aggressively enforce its mark. In addition to Apple’s use, the mark and its derivatives have been widely referenced in the US – most notably by Verizon in its “There’s A Map For That” advertising campaign (intended to mock the limited coverage of Apple’s exclusive US carrier, AT&T). An “app for that” catch-phrase generator, “App For That“, was also developed. And writers seem to love using the phrase in their article and blog headlines.
In this light, one wonders if such uses of the mark and its derivatives reinforce or dilute the mark’s association with Apple. If the latter, Apple will have to go on the offensive to protect its rights, lest it lose them.
We’ll keep you “app”-rised of new developments.
Posted in Foreign Protection, Protection & Enforcement | No Comments »
Consultation by CIPO on Madrid and Singapore Treaties
Wednesday, January 13th, 2010
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) recently launched a new consultation on possible Canadian accession to the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks (the Madrid Protocol) and the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks (the Singapore Treaty).
This is not the first time CIPO has looked at the issue of Canada acceding to the Madrid Protocol. Five years ago a similar consultation took place. In response to a request for input, CIPO received feedback from the Intellectual Property Institute of Canada and from the International Trademark Association, though no further action was taken by CIPO at that time.
According to CIPO’s backgrounder to the current consultation, the intervening five years have seen important trading partners such as the United States join both the Madrid Protocol and the Singapore Treaty. As a result, according to CIPO, Canada is increasingly seen as isolated in its trademark laws and practices.
Posted in Foreign Protection, Legislation, Registration | No Comments »
Maple Melee Meets End?
Wednesday, August 5th, 2009
There is an update available to an earlier story we blogged concerning an ongoing dispute between American Clothing Associates SA and the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM). We previously reported that a mark integrating Canada’s well-known maple leaf symbol could not be registered in the CTM because it contained the maple leaf, and accordingly improperly connoted an association with Canada.
In a decision released July 16th, the European Court of Justice dismissed American Clothing Associates’ appeal of this decision, and concluded that the maple leaf emblem was indeed protected as a state emblem.
Good coverage of the decision is available at German Trademark Law In A Nutshell – and thanks to Chris of GTLIAN for alerting us to the decision’s release.
Posted in Foreign Protection | No Comments »