Wondering why you haven’t received any updates on the progress of your client’s Madrid Protocol application designating Canada? After reading that question, are you wondering what on earth a Madrid Protocol application is?
Let’s take a step back. The Madrid system is a mechanism that facilitates the registration of trademarks in multiple jurisdictions around the world. One way to file trademark applications in multiple jurisdictions is to engage local counsel in each jurisdiction of interest and work with counsel to file individual applications. By using the Madrid system, however, a trademark owner can file a single international trademark application with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and designate one or more jurisdictions based on just this one application.
We recently shared our Seven Secrets of Security Interests with some tips about security interests in IP registered in the U.S. But often, U.S. IP goes hand-in-hand with trademarks, patents, and copyrights registered in Canada. Should security interests against Canadian IP be treated the same as in the U.S.?
We asked our colleague Silvia de Sousa from Thompson Dorfman Sweatman LLP in Winnipeg, Manitoba to describe the basics of security interests involving Canadian trademarks (as well as patents and copyrights). Silvia’s answers appear below. Enjoy!
This month’s dramatic announcement by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that all foreign domiciled trademark applicants, registrants and parties to USPTO trademark proceedings will now be required to retain U.S. counsel is expected to result in the most significant practical change to domestic trademark prosecution practice in years.
For casual observers, this new rule — set to be effective on Aug. 3, 2019 — may have arrived as an unexpected, or even shocking, development. After all, with this announcement, literally tens of thousands of active, foreign-domiciled participants in the trademark processes of the USPTO will suddenly now require representation by a U.S. attorney, altering years of common practice.
Moreover, the time from announcement to implementation — only 32 days — is remarkably short for agency action of any kind, let alone a new rule set to transform the role of trademark practitioners in relation to a massive class of new clients.
This post is for those who gain pleasure from tidying up. It’s springtime here in DC, so let’s roll up our sleeves and declutter! Your trademark portfolio, that is. You’ll gain a sense of accomplishment AND you can humble-brag about your magical money-saving skills.
As the proud owner of a trademark, you will encounter a number of situations that may prompt you or your company to consider granting a trademark license. Navigating the process of selecting a mark, conducting a trademark search and securing a trademark registration is no small feat. Now that you have accomplished these goals, it is important to make sure you are getting the most out of your investment of time, energy and money. A trademark license may be the most effective way to ensure that your trademark rights primarily benefit you and not a third party.
Businesses operating in the European Union may be familiar with the concept of “seniority.” By claiming seniority, an owner of an EU trademark registration may be able to claim prior rights based on existing national trademark registrations in EU member countries. To illustrate when a business might claim seniority, take the following example:
A trademark assignment is the transfer of ownership of a mark. This usually entails having the owner transfer all its rights, title and interest in a given mark to a third party.
Sounds pretty straightforward, right? Well, imagine you’re not just assigning one trademark to a third party – instead you’re transferring an entire portfolio containing hundreds of marks in dozens of countries. Generally, this transfer of rights must be documented – or recorded – with the trademark office in every jurisdiction where marks have been assigned. Otherwise, the outdated Trademark Office records relating to the ownership of a mark could cause issues, like blocking new applications filed in the new owner’s name. The requirements for assigning trademarks and recording this transfer of rights often vary by jurisdiction, so handling the transfer of a global trademark portfolio can become a major undertaking.
US trademark aficionados know that US registrations depicting logos in black and white allow the trademark owner to display the registered mark in any color. Filing in black and white is often a good way to achieve broader protection in the States, and it helps avoid your having to file a new application if you change the color of your logo in the future. The next time you want to protect your logo outside the USA, however, pause before you send that email to local counsel or submit your Madrid Protocol application depicting the logo in black and white. It’s not safe to assume that a black-and-white registration outside the USA confers “universal” protection for a mark displayed in any color.
To elaborate: counsel in a number of jurisdictions have informed us that black-and-white registrations may not protect marks displayed in any color. We’ve heard this from the EU, Kazakhstan, and Thailand, among other places – though you will of course want to check this with your own local counsel, since this is a fact-specific issue. Worse yet, black-and-white registrations outside the USA may be subject to attack on non-use grounds if the trademark isn’t used in black and white. (How often does that happen?!)
We haven’t run across a treatise or other resource that drills down to this level of trademark nerddom, so this might be a good topic to add to the next edition of the Country Guides (accessible to members of the International Trademark Association). In the meantime – now you’re equipped to ask some more pre-filing questions, to help ensure that your future logo applications will achieve maximum protection.
We found this update from the UK firm HGF ( www.hgf.com ) helpful, and thought you might, too — so we asked permission to re-post it here. Enjoy! P.S. Since we’re lawyers, we have to mention that HGF is not affiliated with Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, and the views expressed in this post are those of HGF, and not those of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP or its clients.– DBRanding® Blog Editors
You will no doubt have received many updates from IP law firms discussing the potentially new landscape for IP rights in the UK and EU in the longer term. Some are long, some short, some academic, but maybe not all practical.
The following briefing answers some of the more practical questions and concerns around managing your trade mark portfolio in light of Brexit. With change comes opportunity, and we at HGF are here to help you maximise that opportunity. We do not claim to know all that will transpire in the next few years come Brexit, no one does, but we hope these initial practical pointers below will help you along the way.
As a European firm of intellectual property specialists with locations in both the UK and mainland Europe, HGF will continue to offer a fully integrated team of professionals in the EU covering not only trade marks, but patents, designs, contentious and non-contentious IP law. Continue reading →
It’s a typical afternoon in the office. You’re taking a look at the watch notices your trademark watching service has recently forwarded for your review – when all of a sudden, you come across a third-party application filed outside the USA for a mark that looks an awful lot like one of your brands.
So, what do you do?
Time to get in touch with local counsel to figure out whether it’s advisable – or even possible – to challenge the registration of this application in their country.
Below, we list some of our favorite tricks for quickly and efficiently getting all the information needed to determine next steps and avoid surprises. (Pro-tip: Drop all your questions for counsel into a single email when you have a looming opposition deadline and time is of the essence!)
The very first step is to make sure counsel doesn’t have any conflicts helping you out – this is an important one!
Worried about deadlines? Confirm with counsel that the opposition deadline is the date listed on the watch notice (beware – they don’t always match!), and ask if extensions are available.
When asking about estimated costs, we like to know the “worst case scenario” – that is, the total fees and expenses when dealing with an applicant who aggressively contests the opposition. Knowing this information up front can help to avoid some unpleasant billing surprises!
Though you’ll want to understand your chances of succeeding in any opposition, it’s a good idea to get the whole story. Could this applicant turn around and challenge the registration of your brands in this or another country? Be sure to discuss the risks of opposing with counsel.
Immediately ask whether a Power of Attorney or other documentation will be required. If you decide to oppose at the last minute, you’ll already have the document in hand and can simply sign and return it to counsel. If you’re told legalized documents are needed, consider asking whether PDF copies will suffice to meet the deadline.
Finally, don’t forget to give counsel a head start – in addition to forwarding the watch notice you spotted, let them know about the relevant applications and registrations you own and any history you might have with the applicant.
Taking advantage of these tips and tricks will help you make the most informed decision possible going forward. And the sooner you can deal with a potential infringer, the better!