Jane Glover Barrister – Mediator – Adjudicator
Tag

trade marks

t

SECTION 25(1)(B) APPLECART STANDS FIRM

S

I was taken aback to read a submission advanced by Pharmazen in Pharmazen Ltd v Anagenix IP Ltd [2020] NZCA 3016, namely that actual market use and conditions should be relevant to the assessment of confusion and deception under s 25(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 2002 as well as to the assessment of confusion and deception under s 17(1)(a) . Such a bold submission! And what would the consequences...

ARE WE DOING IT ALL WRONG? INTERNET EVIDENCE IN TRADE MARK CASES

A

I wrote this piece a long time ago, before the world changed. I wondered about swapping it for something corona-ish, especially as there are some fascinating things going on in the patent world in that area right now. For example, there is talk of both patent rights being “undermined” by State march-in rights under existing legislation, and patent rights being increased under proposed...

IS YOUR WIDELY-USED TRADE MARK VULNERABLE TO REMOVAL FOR NON-USE?

I

Applications for non-use are all about making sure that the owner has crossed every t and dotted every i.  The owner’s evidence is put under the microscope.  Has it shown evidence of use that relates unequivocally to the right period?  The right jurisdiction?  The right goods and services?  Is the mark used in the same form as the mark that is on the register?  And...

The secret laws of trade marks part II: specialist goods and services

T

This post is the second in a two-part series highlighting areas of trade mark law that wouldn’t be easy to find out for the non-expert (Part I, which is about proprietorship, is here).  In Man Truck & Bus AG v Shaanxi Heavy-Duty Automobile Co Ltd [2017] NZHC 2821 Woodhouse J held that the applicant in s 17(1)(a) oppositions involving specialist goods and services will fail automatically...

THE SECRET LAWS OF TRADE MARKS PART I: PROPRIETORSHIP

T

This post is the first in a two-part series about aspects of trade mark law that are invisible to non-experts.  These areas of the law are invisible because they have developed through case law – and sometimes pretty obscure case law – rather than being set out in the legislation. IN PRAISE OF CODIFICATION The good thing about statutes is that they are known, they are usually pretty clear...

ip amendment bill: trade marks

i

The MBIE discussion paper on the IP Amendment Bill was issued recently.  It is divided into four parts: patents, trade marks, designs, and use of AI by IPONZ. I’m doing a few posts highlighting what I see as the key issues.  The discussion on patent reform is here.  My picks for the top three trade mark issues are proprietorship, prior continuous use, and getting rid of the...

Can Tim Batt keep the domain name coalitionparty.co.nz?

C

Earlier this year, comedian Tim Batt registered a handful of “Coalition Party” domain names, shortly after the Destiny Church-brigade announced that it was starting a political party under that name.  I thought it was such a New Zealand-style protest: gentle, non-confrontational, and kind of sweet.  The best part, as you probably know, is that he uploaded an episode of The Male Gayz, a...

CA does a great job in Ziploc case, vanquishing the ghosts of trade marks past

C

I promise that I am not just being obsequious when I say that I was extremely impressed by the Court of Appeal decision in International Consolidated Business Pty Ltd v S C Johnson & Son Inc [2019] NZCA 61, which was issued in March this year.  It is great to see a tricky and important area of trade mark law heading in a sensible direction. The decision of the Court was delivered by Brown J...

Jane Glover Barrister – Mediator – Adjudicator

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.