INTA
Economic Creativity and Theft of IP Act (PROTECT IP Act) was introduced earlier this year in the US Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) was introduced in the US House of Representatives. While there are important differences between the two bills, both provide the US Attorney General with the authority to pursue an action against an infringing site via a court order. Intermediaries that are identified in the respective draft bills— such as Internet service providers (ISPs), payment service providers (PSPs), search engines and ad networks—that receive a court order are then required to stop services to the infringing site using “technically feasible and reasonable measures”.
SOPA and PROTECT IP Act have drawn harsh criticism from various organisations and consumer groups that believe the legislation will have negative consequences, including censorship and “breaking” the Internet. Tis criticism has forced Congress to defer immediate action on the bills. However, other analyses of the measures that are proposed demonstrate that this is not the case. Accordingly, SOPA and PROTECT IP have attracted support from industry groups including INTA that endorse the overall objectives of the bills: to protect consumers and IP by providing the government with tools to combat websites that give easy access to counterfeit goods and pirated content. INTA is supporting these legislative efforts through letters to Congress and numerous meetings with congressional staff to convey the recommendations and insights of INTA’s members.
Harmonisation The US Model State Trademark Bill
In June 2011, the US State of Texas enacted legislation that harmonises Texas trademark law with the Lanham Act, which is the federal statute governing trademark law in the US. The new Texas law reflects the principles that are contained in INTA’s Model State Trademark Bill, which will ensure full state trademark protection for local businesses. To date, 46 states have adopted some form of the model state trademark law, but Texas becomes just the fifth state, along with Alabama, California, Mississippi and Oregon, to pass the newest version of the model bill, which includes the definitions and standards in the federal Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006.
Madrid Protocol in Latin America
INTA is keen to increase the number of countries acceding to international trademark treaties such as the Madrid Protocol (1989), the Trademark Law Treaty
www.worldipreview.com
IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN WHETHER NEW GTLDS WILL ADEQUATELY PROTECT TRADEMARKS AND LEAD TO MEANINGFUL CHOICES FOR USERS WITHOUT UNDERMINING CONSUMER TRUST IN THE INTERNET.
(1994) and, most recently, the Singapore Treaty (2006). Accession to these treaties will result in greater harmonisation in trademark procedures across jurisdictions.
In recent years, INTA has intensified its advocacy for the Madrid Protocol in Latin American countries. There are presently 84 contracting parties, although Cuba is the only Latin American country that is a member.
The prospects for broad Latin American participation in these treaties improved in 2011. The Dominican Republic, Chile and Colombia joined the Trademark Law Treaty and the Colombian Congress’s passage of Law 1455 for the country’s accession to the Madrid Protocol marked a vital step. INTA has worked closely with local authorities and its Colombian members to assist in raising awareness of the advantages of using the multilateral trademark registration system under the Madrid Protocol.
With Law 1455 already signed by Colombia’s president Juan Manuel Santos, the final review is pending at Colombia’s Constitutional Court. In anticipation of an affirmation by the court, authorities and legal counsel are already preparing for the new administrative proceedings to take place once the new treaties are implemented.
Regional watch China: draft trademark law revision
China is in the process of revising its trademark law and has published several drafts for public comment in the past. The most recent draft was released in September 2011 and INTA, which commented on previous drafts, took the opportunity to
indicate its satisfaction with some provisions and to ask questions or raise concerns about others. INTA focused on three major areas: non-traditional marks, bad faith registration and anti-counterfeiting measures.
INTA supported new provisions in the draſt law that would allow for the registration of certain non-traditional marks. Notably, the new draſt allows for sound marks and single colour marks, which are two non-traditional marks that are frequently used by brand owners.
Te association had some concerns regarding the adequacy of protection against bad faith registrations in the new draſt. Previous draſts have included specific provisions for good faith registration, the lack of which would be grounds for preventing any subsequent bad faith registrations. INTA strongly encourages the inclusion of such provisions in future draſts.
Finally, the draft law included increased enforcements against counterfeiting, but left significant room for improvement. For example, statutory damages were doubled, but trademark owners believe that damages should be significantly higher. INTA also noted that the current draft excluded language seen in previous drafts regarding landlord liability.
Visit
www.inta.org/advocacy to find out more about INTA's advocacy efforts.
World Intellectual Property Review e-Digest 2012 23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224 |
Page 225 |
Page 226 |
Page 227 |
Page 228 |
Page 229 |
Page 230 |
Page 231 |
Page 232 |
Page 233 |
Page 234 |
Page 235 |
Page 236 |
Page 237 |
Page 238 |
Page 239 |
Page 240 |
Page 241 |
Page 242 |
Page 243 |
Page 244 |
Page 245 |
Page 246 |
Page 247 |
Page 248 |
Page 249 |
Page 250 |
Page 251 |
Page 252 |
Page 253 |
Page 254 |
Page 255 |
Page 256 |
Page 257 |
Page 258 |
Page 259 |
Page 260 |
Page 261 |
Page 262 |
Page 263 |
Page 264 |
Page 265 |
Page 266 |
Page 267 |
Page 268 |
Page 269 |
Page 270 |
Page 271