Search for: "State v. Coty"
Results 21 - 40
of 65
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jul 2011, 2:59 am
Where the proprietor of a trade mark supplies to its authorised distributors items bearing that mark, intended for demonstration to consumers in authorised retail outlets, and bottles bearing the mark from which small quantities can be taken for supply to consumers as free samples, those goods, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, are not put on the market within the meaning of Directive 89/104 and Regulation No 40/94 [= Case C-127/09 Coty Prestige Lancaster v Simex,… [read post]
14 Nov 2012, 11:58 am
The case is STATE OF KANSAS v. [read post]
14 Nov 2012, 12:58 pm
The case is STATE OF KANSAS v. [read post]
20 Feb 2017, 7:13 am
American Soc. for Testing & Materials v. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 2:58 am
324/09 L’Oréal SA, Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie, Laboratoire Garnier & Cie, L’Oréal (UK) Limited v eBay International AG, eBay Europe SARL and eBay (UK) Limited. [read post]
23 Sep 2023, 3:43 am
It is also questionable whether the Court was correct in stating that consumer perception will only be relevant in certain circumstances, when the CJEU stated at least twice in Louboutin (at least in the English translation – see paras 43 and 48) that it was ‘necessary’, in order to determine whether a marketplace operator makes ‘use’ of a sign, to assess consumer perception. [read post]
3 May 2015, 10:33 pm
After all, "holiday" is no more than a state of mind, surely. [read post]
11 Sep 2014, 4:44 am
This morning he released his Opinion in Case C-441/13 Pez Hejduk v EnergieAgentur.NRW GmbH [available in, amongst others, Italian but not English!] [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 4:57 am
HHJ Hacon accepted the attractiveness of this submission but concluded that “in my view the [CJEU] in its judgment [in Coty Germany GmbH v First Note Perfumes NV, Case C-360/12] drew a conscious distinction between, on the one hand, the event of taking steps to put a sign on a website…and, on the other hand, the event of the display of the sign on the website. [read post]
2 Aug 2015, 4:01 pm
Being unsure whether allowing exploitation of works without prior permission from the relevant rightholder is permitted, the French Council of State has just sought guidance from the CJEU. [read post]
9 Dec 2010, 3:37 am
[this fits with the Court's ruling in Case C-127/09 Coty Prestige Lancaster v Simex, noted by the IPKat here] (2), (3) and (4) The trade mark proprietor is entitled to oppose further commercialisation of the unboxed products within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Directive 89/104 and Article 13(2) of Regulation No 40/94 where the outer packaging have been removed from perfumes and cosmetics without the consent of the trade mark proprietor if, as a result of the removal of the… [read post]
5 Apr 2020, 3:15 am
(Part II) https://t.co/PH8Klgd7wo 2020-04-01 Supreme Court Rules States Have Sovereign Immunity From Copyright Infringement Suits: Is Your State Government the… https://t.co/DkS3NCIDPm 2020-04-02 CIPL Responds to Privacy Commissioner of Canada’s Proposals for Ensuring Appropriate Regulation of AI https://t.co/vRdhYD43Ye 2020-04-02 Government COVID-19 response includes compulsory licenses for patented emergency medical needs https://t.co/d0mVt5hHdG 2020-04-02 CJEU The… [read post]
5 Apr 2020, 3:15 am
(Part II) https://t.co/PH8Klgd7wo 2020-04-01 Supreme Court Rules States Have Sovereign Immunity From Copyright Infringement Suits: Is Your State Government the… https://t.co/DkS3NCIDPm 2020-04-02 CIPL Responds to Privacy Commissioner of Canada’s Proposals for Ensuring Appropriate Regulation of AI https://t.co/vRdhYD43Ye 2020-04-02 Government COVID-19 response includes compulsory licenses for patented emergency medical needs https://t.co/d0mVt5hHdG 2020-04-02 CJEU The… [read post]
5 Apr 2020, 3:15 am
(Part II) https://t.co/PH8Klgd7wo 2020-04-01 Supreme Court Rules States Have Sovereign Immunity From Copyright Infringement Suits: Is Your State Government the… https://t.co/DkS3NCIDPm 2020-04-02 CIPL Responds to Privacy Commissioner of Canada’s Proposals for Ensuring Appropriate Regulation of AI https://t.co/vRdhYD43Ye 2020-04-02 Government COVID-19 response includes compulsory licenses for patented emergency medical needs https://t.co/d0mVt5hHdG 2020-04-02 CJEU The… [read post]
10 Dec 2019, 12:20 am
GuestKat Peter Ling reports on this interesting decision.Richard Vary provides a guest contribution, in which he looks into the recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit, which overturned a decision issued in December 2017 by Judge Selna in the Central District of California, instead going to a jury trial.Trade MarksGuestKat Léon Dijkman looks at the recent Opinion of Advocate General Bobek in Primart… [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 7:43 am
On June 19, 2009, in Zino Davidoff SA v. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 12:14 pm
On June 19, 2009, in Zino Davidoff SA v. [read post]
29 Dec 2022, 8:20 am
In contrast to the case of L’Oréal v. eBay (C-324/09) and the aforementioned Coty case, the CJEU was asked about the fact that the online sales website in question included sales both from the site’s owner and the online marketplace. [read post]
20 Nov 2012, 6:57 am
If the Court wants member state input on what the shape of EU law should be, which I think it should, then it could perhaps try to find more time for Member States’ observations. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 2:57 am
The French court of appeal cancelled the French marks and assigned the name domain « France.com » to the State of France. [read post]
