On using generic terms as Trademarks

Most of my clients want to adopt some thing that shows signals to the products or services they are into. Instead of creating a brand for themselves they want to rely on generic term. They should know that it is the same case with every trader. So it is better to adopt a distinctive term than a descriptive or suggestive name.

Read HOTELS.COM, HOW GENERIC—TRADEMARK LOST ITS LUGGAGE! http://brandaideblog.com/advertising/hotels-com-how-generic%e2%80%94trademark-lost-its-luggage/

Comments

IPAB has allowed an appeal and granted patent to Pfizer for Tofacitinib and its salts

In a decision dated 21st August 2020 IPAB vide its Order has allowed an appeal and granted Patent to Appellant M/s. PFIZER PRODUCTS INC., USA for Tofacitinib and its salts. The appeal is against the order dated 3 rd September 2015 passed by the Controller of Patents under Section 15 of the Indian Patents Act, whereby the Appellant’s Indian patent application no. 00991/MUMNP/2003 was rejected on the ground that it is hit by section 13(1)(b) and being non-patentable under section 3(d). The Appellant requested for an urgent hearing of the matter and IPAB considered the request for urgent hearing and passed the present order. This Patent application claimed the compound 3-{(3R,4R)-4-Methyl-3-[methyl-(7H-pyrrolo[2,3-d]pyrimidin-4-yl)-amino]-piper...

Tata's Herbal Tea fails to get patent protection

The patent office has refused to grant a patent to Tata Global Beverages (formerly known as Tata Tea) for its 'invention' regarding a process for preparation of flavoured herbal tea. Based on the opposition filed by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) and TATA Tea failed to provide sufficiency of disclosure of the invention the Controller of Patents refused to grant patent. Tata Global Beverages, the patent application has claimed a new flavoured herbal tea composition comprising 1% to 8% of Darjeeling Broken, 10% to 50% of flavour concentrate and the rest being tea particles. Tata Global Beverages had submitted the patent filing without appropriate clarification for the unique taste for the tea composition. It was unable to find out the technical advancement of the application as compared to the existing knowledge. Thus controller had to refuse the grant of patent. Source: http://www.financialexpress.com/article/markets/commodities/tata-global-bev...

Honourable Justice Manmohan Singh Tenure as Chairman of IPAB (Intellectual Property Appellate Board) extended for Another three months

The Supreme Court on September 16, 2020 has extended the tenure of Honourable Justice Manmohan Singh as Chairman of IPAB (Intellectual Property Appellate Board) for another three months. Justice Manmohan Singh was appointed on July 2017 for a term of three years. However as per the rules governing the appointment his term would come to an end on attaining retirement age of 65 years on 22nd September 2019. Since Government has not appointed any Chairman thereafter, on a Petition by International Association for Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) the Supreme Court has extended his term for another year i.e, till 21st September 2020 as the Petitioner claimed that IPAB will be Defunct with his retirement thereby causing hardship several litigants. The Central Government has notified in March 2020 that Justice Singh will continue as the chairman of IPAB up to September 21, 2020, or until further orders, whichever is earlier. Now with this extension, Ho...

Search This Blog