Search for: "mark" Results 1 - 20 of 115,681
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Dec 2008, 5:07 pm
var addthis_pub="bevans1986";It's not just a trade mark infringement case......it's a Marks and Spencer's trade mark infringement case. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 8:57 am by Neil Melliship
A Private Members Bill was introduced in Canada’s federal parliament yesterday, which, if passed, will result in significant amendments to the official mark provisions in the Trade-marks Act. [read post]
30 Sep 2008, 3:49 am
On Sept. 26, the Ninth Circuit found that a mark can be counterfeit even when the genuine mark is not used on the same goods. [read post]
28 Sep 2010, 2:00 am by James Yang
Under the false marking statute (35 USC 292), a patentee may be liable up to $500 per falsely marked product.   [read post]
19 Sep 2006, 2:54 pm
Witness the following marks advertised in the Canadian Trade-marks Journal over the course of the last 3 months. [read post]
29 Dec 2009, 6:08 am by Karen Monteith
An Order in Council has amended Schedule 2 of the Olympic and Paralympic Marks Act to add 38 new marks to the prohibited marks list. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 4:25 pm by Larry Munn
Section 23(2) of the Act provides that only the owner of a certification mark may authorize others to use the mark in association with wares that meet the defined standard.  [read post]
14 May 2008, 7:25 pm
  Although marking is not required, it’s beneficial because marking serves as constructive notice to the world that the product is patented. [read post]
12 Jul 2009, 9:27 pm by Ravi
Mitac stylised mio was not identical to the Singtel mark notwithstanding that phonetically the marks are identical. [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 9:17 am by Larry
Rather, the marking rules already tell us that the origin for marking purposes is "Canada." [read post]
29 Jan 2010, 2:06 pm by James Yang
You may also be interested in Patent Marking. [read post]
28 Feb 2010, 5:10 pm by Dennis Crouch
Related Posts: False Marking Lawsuits Forest Group Decision Constitutionality of the False Marking Statute Patent Marking [read post]
4 Oct 2009, 4:45 am
On Friday 30 September 2009 the Court of First Instance decided that two trade mark applications for exclamation mark symbols (as shown on the left) are not distinctive enough to qualify for Community trade mark registration, (cases T-75/08 and T-191/08). [read post]
16 Jun 2015, 8:23 am by Naomi Abraham
 The registration was opposed on the grounds that the mark was devoid of inherent distinctive character, and the case has become a fascinating study of the limits of the registerability of shape marks in Europe. [read post]
21 May 2007, 8:32 pm
Mark Fowler is a future thinker.Mark is Research Director and Co-Founder of The Global Foresight Network - an international consultancy to organisations wanting a pathway to their future.Today I spoke to Mark about the future and how we mediators may learn to think about our own destiny and take steps to make sure we get there intact.Here is the first part of that video interview over at the Mediation vBlog Project with part 2 to come and here is a detailed explanation of the… [read post]
10 Feb 2010, 7:48 am by Michael W. Huseman
We look forward to hearing from Mark about recent developments in IP law. [read post]
22 Apr 2010, 5:39 am by The Docket Navigator
The false marking statute 'requires a fine to be imposed for every offense of marking any unpatented article.' . . . [read post]
30 Oct 2013, 11:49 am by Simon Fodden
Apparently, Smart and Biggar registered a sound mark with the Canadian Trade-Marks Office two decades ago; but thereafter the Office refused to register any further sound marks. [read post]