In the year 2001, tapas restaurant ‘the Encounter’ opens its doors in the city of Nijmegen. They register their logo for catering services, in order to protect the goodwill of the restaurant.In the year 2014, a restaurant named ‘the Encounter Zutphen’ is opened in the city of Zutphen (approximately 50 km from Nijmegen). The party from Nijmegen claims that this is infringement of their trademark rights. »trademarks
It is a common thought among entrepreneurs that IP rights have no value in China. Nowadays, this (mis-) conception is completely outdated. In 2015 Chinese companies filed more than a million patent applications (a third of the total amount of 3 million patent applications worldwide). Whereas American and Japanese companies filed half a million applications each. China is also the number one country regarding trademark registrations. In 2015 a vast number of 2.8 million trademark applications were filed in China. As a result, an increasing number of Chinese companies can be found in the court of law as the demanding party in trademark infringement cases. »design-law
In 2012, Trine Anderson designs the Wire Basket. She created this design as an employee of the firm Ferm Living. In the Netherlands the copyrights belong to the company if the products have been made by employees (as part of their job). Many (daily used) products can be protected by copyrights. However, if no possible creative choices have been made (as the shape is too basic), the design cannot be protected. The Burly Basket Round, introduced by the company Lifestyle, has a great resemblance to the Wire Basket. This raises the question if the Burly Basket Round is an infringement of the copyrights of Ferm Living. Lifestyle states that, due to the trivial and functional shape of the Wire Basket Round, no Intellectual property claims can be made. »copyright
Design rights are the perfect tool to claim protection of shapes. However, this right has its limitations. Lose parts of an object cannot be protected through design rights. The philosophy behind this is that non-visible parts should be replaceable at all times. Therefore, the manufacturer can only claim design rights for the parts which are visible. However, how far can we take this? »design-law
Drinkopoly is a remarkable game. Basically, the main goal is to drink with your friends. As you can imagine, playing the game is a unique experience every time, because one simply does not remember the previous encounter. The logo speaks for itself, showing a drinking couple, with one of them laying on the ground, completely drunk. When trademark protection is being sought for the logo of Drinkopoly, Hasbro (the producer of Monopoly) opposes the application. »trademarks
MENTOS has been selling chewing gum under the name MENTOS PURE FRESH for several years. In order to protect her rights MENTOS has registered the following trademarks: the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH, the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH 3 and a figurative depiction of the word PURE.
Defendant sells chewing gum under the trademark DENTYNE PURE and has registered its logo as a trademark.
Infringement or not?