Search for: "State v. Mark" Results 5021 - 5040 of 19,837
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jul 2024, 9:56 am by Katharina Schmid (schmid-ip)
The case-law of a Member State, while it is not binding on the EU Courts, may provide relevant indications about the relevant public’s perception of the sign at issue in that state (see para 58, with reference to GC judgment T-40/03 – Julián Murúa Entrena, EU:T:2005:285, para 69). [read post]
9 May 2011, 4:13 pm
Fourthly, in assessing the distinctive character of the mark in question the General Court distorted the relevant facts and did not sufficiently state the reasons for its judgment. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 11:41 am by Kiera Flynn
United States, Smith v. [read post]
22 May 2020, 6:45 am by Sophie Corke
The German Pelham court confirms when sampling is illegalNever Too Late 263 [Week ending May 3] The CJEU (again) on 3D trademarks: the Gömböc judgment | The non-systematic relevance of earlier IP rights: from Gömböc to Brompton Bicycle | Trade marks and mobile apps: the PlanetArt v Photobox saga draws to a close (in PlanetArt's favour) | SkyKicked: High Court confirms trade mark infringement | Is COVID-19 a Nietzschean moment for… [read post]
4 May 2017, 4:24 am by Edith Roberts
” In The Atlantic, Matt Ford views Maslenjak v. [read post]
23 Jan 2009, 8:09 am
Dauray, 215 F.3d 257, 264 (2d Cir. 2000) (alteration and quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. [read post]