米国商標出願における法人格の選択または名称の翻訳についての解説

米国商標 法人名 日本国内では法人には登記の際に定めた名称があり、法人としての活動にはその名称が使用されます。法人の名称には、その法人格を示す「株式会社」や「合同会社」などの文字も使用されます。日本企業や日本の社団が米国 …

商標登録insideNews: 荏原、「知財図鑑」へ参画 知財情報公開し活用・展開の可能性模索 | 財経新聞

荏原製作所は7日、保有する知的財産の情報を「知財図鑑」に掲載したと発表。知財図鑑は、知財を分かりやすく表現、可能性を提起(妄想)し、Webで公開することにより連携を促し新規事業の創出を目指す知財のデータベース。荏原は知財情報の公開で外部連携を進め、保有知財や技術を活かした新規事業・サービスの共創を目指していく。

情報源: 荏原、「知財図鑑」へ参画 知財情報公開し活用・展開の可能性模索 | 財経新聞

知財図鑑
知財図鑑 Note

Loading

米国下院司法委員会(House Committee on the Judiciary) vol.2 商標_動画(embedded)

米国下院司法委員会 動画

米国下院司法委員会(United States House Committee on the Judiciary)は、アメリカ合衆国下院の司法制度に関わる立法を検討する委員会です。1つの小委員会は裁判所、知的財産、およびインターネットに関する組織であり、米国裁判所の管理、連邦証拠規則、民事および上訴手続、司法倫理、特許法、商標法、および情報技術を管轄しています。

1.Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, 2:15:16 米国下院司法委員会 動画

Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet

続きを読む“米国下院司法委員会(House Committee on the Judiciary) vol.2 商標_動画(embedded)”

Loading

商標登録insideNew: Seventh Circuit Sides with Plaintiffs in Parmesan Cheese Claims | National Law Review

The Seventh Circuit recently reversed a district court’s dismissal of a class action false advertising complaint, holding that an ingredient list’s disclosure of components other than parmesan cheese did not foreclose the possibility of reasonable consumers being deceived by a “100% Grated Parmesan Cheese” front label claim.

情報源: Seventh Circuit Sides with Plaintiffs in Parmesan Cheese Claims

続きを読む“商標登録insideNew: Seventh Circuit Sides with Plaintiffs in Parmesan Cheese Claims | National Law Review”

Loading

商標登録insideNews: Major Changes To Trademark And Copyright Law Included In Massive Stimulus Package | Fox Rothschild LLP – JDSupra

Signed into law on December 28, the voluminous Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 makes major changes to American intellectual property laws via its inclusion of the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (TM Act); the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2020 (CASE Act); and an amendment to Title 18 of the United States Code that adds Section 2319C titled “Illicit digital transmission services.”

情報源: Major Changes To Trademark And Copyright Law Included In Massive Stimulus Package | Fox Rothschild LLP – JDSupra

H. R. 2426(pdf)

Summary of H.R.2426 CASE ACT
Passed House (10/22/2019)
Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2019 or the CASE Act of 2019

This bill creates the Copyright Claims Board, a body within the U.S. Copyright Office, to decide copyright disputes. Damages awarded by the board are capped at $30,000.

Participation in board proceedings is voluntary with an opt-out procedure for defendants, and parties may choose instead to have a dispute heard in court. If the parties agree to have their dispute heard by the board, they shall forego the right to be heard before a court and the right to a jury trial. Board proceedings shall have no effect on class actions.

The board shall be authorized to hear copyright infringement claims, actions for a declaration of noninfringement, claims that a party knowingly sent false takedown notices, and related counterclaims.

The bill provides for various procedures, including with respect to requests for information from the other party and requests for the board to reconsider a decision.

The board may issue monetary awards based on actual or statutory damages.

The parties shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs except where there is bad faith misconduct.

A board's final determination precludes relitigating the claims in court or at the board. Parties may challenge a board decision in federal district court only if (1) the decision was a result of fraud, corruption, or other misconduct; (2) the board exceeded its authority or failed to render a final determination; or (3) in a default ruling or failure to prosecute, the default or failure was excusable.

商標登録insideNews: Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 | Lathrop GPM – JDSupra

Loading

商標登録insideNews: Toyota ‘Grand Highlander’ Trademark Might Mean Big Things … Literally | motortrend.com

The Toyota Highlander SUV might just gain a larger, long-wheelbase stablemate. According to Merriam-Webster, the word “grand” is defined as “having more importance than others” or as “large and striking in size.” Toyota’s trademark filing for “Grand Highlander” signals the possible arrival of a new Toyota Highlander variant that fits both definitions.

情報源: Toyota ‘Grand Highlander’ Trademark Might Mean Big Things … Literally

続きを読む“商標登録insideNews: Toyota ‘Grand Highlander’ Trademark Might Mean Big Things … Literally | motortrend.com”

Loading

商品・サービス国際分類〔第11-2021版〕の主な変更点

毎年実務上、新年1月1日は、新しい商品・サービス国際分類での取扱が始まります。今回の「商品・サービス国際分類〔第11-2021版〕」は、令和3年1月1日以降の商標登録出願に適用されます。コロナ禍の影響で国際会議では変更点などに関して電子的な投票で決められたそうですが、その主な変更点を下記に掲載します。特許庁のサイトには情報元の第11-2021版の変更点一覧(エクセル:21KB)があります。なお、類の移行や新設をともなう変更は、従来通り5年に一度行われ、来年の2022年はその類の移行や新設をともなう5年目に該当しますので、第12-2022版に移行することが予定されています。

続きを読む“商品・サービス国際分類〔第11-2021版〕の主な変更点”

Loading

商標登録&紛争 最高裁(昭和33年 (オ) 1104号)橘正宗事件

最高裁(昭和33年 (オ) 1104号)橘正宗事件 [判決日]昭和36年6月27日判決 争点 取引上相互に紛れることのない商品同士であっても、同一または類似の商標をこれらの商品に使用する場合に同一営業主の製造または販売と …

商標登録insideNews: Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 | Lathrop GPM – JDSupra

Congress has just passed the bi-partisan Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (TMA), which amends the Trademark Act to provide new procedures for third-party submission of evidence relating to trademark applications, to establish ex parte proceedings for reexamination and expungement of outstanding trademark registrations, and to provide for a rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm in trademark infringement proceedings.

情報源: Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 | Lathrop GPM – JDSupra

On December 22, 2020, Congress passed the content of a pending bill, H.R. 6196, the “Trademark Modernization Act of 2020,” as part of its year-end virus relief and spending package. Among other things, the Act seeks to create more efficient processes to challenge registrations that are not being used in commerce, including by establishing new ex parte proceedings. The Act also seeks to unify the standard for irreparable harm with respect to injunctions in trademark cases, in light of inconsistencies that have emerged across federal courts after the Supreme Court’s decision in eBay v. MercExchange, LLC, 547 U.S. 388 (2006).

情報源: Gibson Dunn

H.R.6196 — 116th Congress (2019-2020)
商標近代化法(TMA)は商標出願に関連する証拠を第三者が提出するための新しい手順を提供し、未処理の商標の再審査と抹消のための査定系手続きを確立します。米国商標制度における言わば情報提供制度のように思われます。

On December 27, 2020, the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (“TMA”) became law after it passed Congress and was signed by the President as part of the year-end Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2021.1 The TMA, which will become effective one year after its signature into law, introduces significant amendments to the Lanham Act2 designed to modernize trademark examination procedures and combat the increasing numbers of trademark registrations covering marks not used in commerce.

情報源: Trademark Modernization Act Becomes Law: Establishes New Procedures to Remove Deadwood Registrations, Restores Presumption of Irreparable Harm, and Protects the Independence of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board | Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP – JDSupra

Summary of H.R.6196
This bill makes several changes to trademark law, such as by providing new mechanisms for opposing and canceling trademark registrations at the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) and by making it easier to secure an injunction.

The bill authorizes a third party to submit evidence to the PTO to oppose an application for a federal trademark registration.

The bill establishes a procedure for any party to petition the PTO to expunge a registration for a trademark that has not been used in commerce. The bill also establishes a procedure for any party to petition the PTO to reexamine any trademark registration on such nonuse grounds.

The PTO may also initiate such an expungement or reexamination proceeding.

If a plaintiff has prevailed in court in asserting certain trademark rights, that plaintiff shall be entitled to a presumption that the plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm for purposes of determining whether the plaintiff is entitled to a permanent injunction. If a trademark plaintiff is seeking a preliminary injunction, that plaintiff is entitled to this presumption upon a court finding that the plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits of the case. Under current law, a plaintiff must establish irreparable harm to secure an injunction.

In addition, the PTO Director shall have the authority to reconsider, modify, or set aside certain decisions made by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

The Government Accountability Office shall report to Congress on PTO efforts to address false and inaccurate claims in trademark registrations and applications.

Loading

1 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 402
146/402