Specialisation in developing " guided New Trade Mark.


Free Consultation on Trade Mark Registration

It is our continuous effort to provide free advice to the public on new coin Trade Mark . Having 19 years establishment of RKC and 29 years on IP work would be invaluable assistance .

Thursday, May 14, 2009


by Make your Mark - Jenkins
Jenkins is our IP Agent in UK

When Steve Jobs, the co-founder of Apple Computers , announced the launch of the company's IPHONE multifunctional mobile device in January , the word had hardly left his mouth , before Cisco Technology sued for trade mark infringement. Cisco owns long-standing US Trade mark rights in the mark, the validity of which have now been called into question.

Todate , this trade mark clash has been confined to the US . What would be the position , however, if it spills over into Europe ? In a word, complicated. Let us look at the position on the CTm register, for example . In chronological oeder , we have the following rights for IPHONE marks in Class 9 :

1. CTM registration No. 796268 for IPHONE owned by Cisco Technology. This registration is dated 14 April 1998 and was granted about a year later. On 18 December 2006, a firm of German lawyers , CMS Hasche Sigle , filed a revocation action against this registration. Coincidentally - or perhaps not- this appears to have been the precise date that Cisco launched an IPHONE product (according toreports on the internet) . One wonders whether the power behind the CMS throne will eventually be revealed.

2. CTM application No. 2901007 for IPHONE owned by Apple Computer. This application is dated 21 October 2002 and is the subject of three oppositions filed by a Spanish telecoms company , Sociedad Promotora de las telecomunicaciones en Asturias (SPTA) , who own Telecable, a japanese phone company. Aiphone Co, and two individulas, M.J Funke and D Bonk. SPTA 's opposition is based on an earlier Spanish trade mark right for IPHONO , Aiphone's opposition is based on an earlier Irish trade mark registration for AIPHONE, whilst the third opposition is based on an earlier CTM registration for TYPHOON.

Interestingly , Apple's CTM application was only allowed to proceed following a successful appeal (R149/2005-2) brought against the Examiner's objections and decided in October 2005.

3. CTM application No. 3948098 for AL-PI IPHONE (stylised) owned by Catalana De telecomunicacions Societat Operadora De Xarves. This application is dated 20 July 2004 , but not by either Cisco or Apple, even though it covers highly relevant goods and services.

4. German trade mark application No. 30409862 for FREENET IPHONE owned by freenet.de

5. Hungarian trade mark application No.M024701 for IPHONE owned by Apple Computer

6. International Trade Mark application No. 77007808 for IPHONE in the of the mysterious Ocean Telecom Services. The international right designates 34 countries , and

7. Opposed UK trade mark applicayion No. 23800997 for IPHONE owned by ICX Europe . This application has been opposed by Aiphone Co.

As one can see , there is much to resolve before a winner or winners emerges with the trade mark rights to IPHONE. One assumes , however, that , given Apple Computer's commitment to the mark, they will eventually obtain the necessary rights, even if it involves generous payment to other , either of money or of access to technology.

* Pendaftaran Jenama perlukan strategi . "Advertisement and Vast Promotion" adalah sia-sia kalau Jenama kita tidak berdaftar !

No comments:


OBJECTION MATTERS - (understanding why a mark being objected)

(Manual of Trade Mark Law & Practice in Malaysia)

In deciding any question of possible conflict between two application or between an application and a registered trade mark , there are two main factors before raising an objection under this Section 19(1)and (2). These are :

- whether the marks are identical or so nearly resemble each other as to be likely to deceive or cause confusion ; and

- whether the marks are used on the same goods or services , the same description of goods or services , or whether the goods and services are closely related.

* When comparing cases, Examiners should always consider each mark as a whole. It is clear that marks are identical if they are the same in every detail when compared side by side. The test for deciding whether the marks so nearly resemble each other are established in case of law as below:

1. Imperfect Recollection
2.Appearance and Sound
3. Essential Feature
4.Composite Marks
5.Idea of Marks
6.Device Marks
7.Related Marks - confusion
8.Contextual Confusion of Marks
9. Comparing Goods and Services
10.Cross search
11.Co-pending Conflicts
12.Conflicting Marks
13.House Mark

Dalam lain perkataan , sekiranya permohonan anda dibantah di bawah Section 19(1) dan (2) , bermakna Pemeriksa telah membuat pemeriksaan bagi semua di atas dan salah satu tidak memenuhi syarat yang diperlukan. Jadi kalau anda lepas dari No. 1 - 13, mereka akan "proceed" permohonan anda .

About this blog

email : rozarita@rozaritakamal.com
website : www.rozaritakamal.com

Apa itu Trade Mark/ Jenama ?
Mengapa ia penting?
Bagaimana membina jenama yang baik?
Mengapa tempuh untuk mendapatkan sijil sangat lama?
Adakah kos mendaftar sangat mahal?

Tahukah anda perlindungan Trade Mark bukan seumur hidup anda tapi selama-lamanya....

Anda penjual burger, nasi lemak, kain batik, belacan, katering, tailor, tuition center, tadika, salon, kedai runcit, restoran , kedai makan, penjual pakaian, tukang masak, rumah percutian/hotel, spa, beauty centre, kedai buku...

Anda adalah termasuk dalam golongan yang memerlukan perlindungan JENAMA.

Blog saya adalah kisah kisah yang saya lalui dalam dunia penjenamaan, apa yang saya lihat dan apa yang boleh kita lakukan . Mungkin usaha ini akan meningkatkan kesedaran tentang kepentingan Harta Intelek dalam setiap perniagaan.

Kos asas untuk mendaftar JENAMA - approx RM2,500.00
Tempuh perlindungan = 10 tahun.

Kos renewal - approx RM1,000.00
Tempuh perlindungan = 10 tahun

(setiap 10 tahun anda cuma perlu "renew" sekali untuk 10 tahun berikutnya)


Brand Finance defines brand as “trademark and associated goodwill.”

Its methodology is based on determining the economic value of a trademark by applying the company’s royalty rate to future revenues attributable to the brand over a five year period.

Therefore, under its definition of brand, the valuation of a trademark and a brand is the same thing.

- Sean Stonefield , Forbes staff