In Fox Head, Inc. v Fox Street Wear Pte Ltd [2018] SGIPOS 8, Singaporean clothing distributor Fox Street Wear Pte Ltd (‘the Applicant’) applied to register the below mark (‘the Application Mark’) in Class 25. This was the same mark which had previously been refused registration in Singapore in Class 18, via a successful opposition […]
Similarity of Marks Examined in Singapore ‘Monster’ Case
In Monster Energy Company v Glamco Co., Ltd. [2018] SGIPOS 7, multinational energy drinks manufacturer Monster (‘the Opponent’) unsuccessfully opposed an application to register the mark ‘SWEET MONSTER’ (‘the Application Mark’) in Class 30 by Korean dessert purveyor Glamco (‘the Applicant’). The Registrar denied the Opponent’s three grounds of opposition. The first was that, following […]
What Constitutes a Family of Trademarks in Singapore?
McCHICKEN®, McNUGGETS® and McFLURRY® immediately conjure up images of the ‘family of marks’ owned by McDonald’s Corporation. Indeed, the ‘family of marks’ doctrine is well-established in trademark law. Be that as it may, can it be said that there exists a family of marks when they are not owned by the same entity? What needs […]
Updates to Vietnam Patent and Trademark Procedures
Following on from our previous article on patent updates in Vietnam, this piece serves to summarise the key amendments made to both patent and trademark procedures by the NOIP commencing January 2018. New regulations with regard to patent and trademark procedures in Vietnam came into force on 15th January 2018. These amended regulations aim to […]
Louis Vuitton Counterfeit Case in Singapore Clarifies Definitions of ‘Import’ and ‘Export’ for Trade Mark Infringement Purposes
In the recent Singapore High Court case of Louis Vuitton Malletier v Megastar Shipping Pte Ltd [2017] SGHC 305, the Court held that a freight forwarder who was unwittingly sent counterfeit goods into Singapore for transshipment was not liable for trademark infringement. The case concerned two shipments from China bound for Indonesia via Singapore. The […]
Mattel, Inc. v Aman Bijal Mehta: A Loss of Face for ‘Barbie’?
“Hi, Barbie….Hi, Ken! Do you wanna go for a ride? Sure, Ken! Jump in…I’m a Barbie girl in the Barbie world……Life in plastic, it’s fantastic! You can brush my hair, undress me everywhere…..Imagination, life is your creation…..Come on, Barbie, let’s go party!……I’m a blond bimbo girl in a fantasy world…..Dress me up, make it tight, […]
New Indonesian Customs Regulation for Protection of IP Rights
The Indonesian Government has recently implemented legislation to assist IP owners to enforce their copyrights and trademarks. The Regulation (No. 20 of 2017) came into force on August 2, 2017. The new Regulation provides that IP owners with rights registered in Indonesia may apply for customs recordal to the Directorate General of Customs and Excise […]
A Prefix Can Fix – Apple’s iPad v Xiaomi’s MI PAD
A clash between two tech giants before the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS), Apple Inc. v Xiaomi Singapore Pte Ltd [2017] SGIPOS 10, ended when the ruling favored Xiaomi (“the Applicant”) to register the mark ‘MI PAD’ for its computer tablet products in the face of a move from Apple Inc. (“the Opponent”), the […]
Myanmar Presents New Trademark Bill
Myanmar has yet to produce its own specific legislation on trademarks. As a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the World Trade Organization (WTO), the nation is expected to deliver its IP laws in the near future to provide protection for trademarks, copyright, patents, and other intellectual property. From August 8-10, 2017, […]
Updates on Use Requirements for Trademark Registrations in the Philippines
The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) recently announced changes to the filing of Declaration of Actual Use (DAU) for registered marks. On 7 July 2017, the Registry issued Memorandum Circular No. 17-010 (IPOPHL MC No. 17-010; Subject: Rules and Regulations on Trademarks, Service Marks, Trade Names and Marked or Stamped Containers of 2017) […]