possible in this case.
that the EU trade mark reform will have
little or no impact on Bosnia and
Herzegovina. The reason for this is not the
lack of will, but the lack of efficient
political mechanisms and of means to keep
pace with the changes.
industrial designs and topographies of
semiconductor products have recently
entered into force in Montenegro. The
changes aim to bring Montenegro's IP
legislation fully in line with the European
Union's legislation and relevant
international treaties. Below is the
summary of the most important changes.
force on 8 July 2016, generally bringing
greater clarity to certain requirements and
procedures.
international trade mark registration, the
four-month deadline for appointing a local
representative is now calculated from the
date on which WIPO issued the
notification, as opposed to the date of
receipt of the notification.
in case of trade mark infringement. A fine
in the amount of EUR 2,000 -10,000 may
be imposed against a legal entity, EUR
500 - 3,000 against an entrepreneur and
EUR 250 -1,500 against a physical person
and the responsible person within a legal
entity.
watch requirements and market
inspectorate activities, which were
previously regulated by the Law on
Implementation of Intellectual Property
Rights (Official Gazette of the Republic of
Montenegro 45/05). These provisions have
now been incorporated into the trade
mark and industrial design laws.
trade mark in Montenegro after this
country accedes to the EU.
entered into force on 19 July 2016, are in
line with the Directive 98/71/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council
on the legal protection of designs.
Community Design in Montenegro have
been included and the exhaustion of rights
within the EU has been further clarified, to
take effect when Montenegro accedes to
the EU.
question of the cancellation of a design on
absolute or relative grounds. The
cancellation lawsuit may be filed during
the whole time of validity of a design, as
well as after the expiration of the same or
renunciation of a design right.
mirandah asia (philippines) inc
(Westmont) filed an opposition against the
registration of the mark ANGIMAX in the
name of Cathay YSS Distributors Co. Inc.
(Cathay) for use on pharmaceutical
preparations namely tablets for the
treatment of ischaemic heart disease,
angina pectoris, sequelae of infraction in
Class 5.
prior registration for the mark AMPIMAX
registered on 24 July 2008 for antibiotic
pharmaceutical preparations under Class
5. It should be noted that Section 123.1
(d) of the Republic Act No. 8293, also
known as the Intellectual Property Code
(IP Code) of the Philippines, states that a
mark cannot be registered if it is identical
with a registered mark belonging to a
different proprietor or a mark with an
earlier filing or priority date, in respect of:
confusion.
filed as early as 2008 while Cathay's mark
ANGIMAX was filed in 2013.
observed that both marks consist of three
syllables: AM-PI-MAX and AN-GI-MAX.
The similarity of the word marks lies in
the beginning letter A, the middle letter I
and the ending syllable MAX. However, the
middle letters M and P of AMPIMAX
created a stark difference from the middle
letters N and G of the ANGIMAX.
ANGIMAX was derived from the
treatment for which the product is being
used, which included the treatment for
angina pectoris, which is a medical term
for chest pain or discomfort due to
coronary heart disease, which occurs
when the heart muscle does not get as
much blood as it needs due to narrowed
or blocking of one or more of the heart's
arteries, also called ischemia. On the other
hand, Westmont's mark AMPIMAX was
derived from the drug Ampicillin which is
a penicillin-like antibiotic used to treat
certain infections caused by bacteria such
as pneumonia, bronchitis, as well as ear,
lung, skin, and urinary tract infections. This
coined independently of, and based on
distinct goods and/or pharmaceutical
products.
Intellectual Property Office of the
Philippines, in their decision dated 18
February 2016, held that the likelihood of
the consumers being deceived, mistaken
or confused was remote because of the
highly sensitive nature of the respective
parties' drugs. The sheer disparity in the
nature and purposes of the goods
precluded the probability of confusion or
mistake.
goods or pharmaceutical products, Cathay
could not be said to have had the intent
to ride on the goodwill of the mark
AMPIMAX, which reinforces earlier cases,
especially given the breadth of class 5. The
decision of the Bureau of Legal Affairs is
currently the subject of an appeal filed at
the Office of the Director General on 1
April 2016.
mirandah asia (thailand) co ltd
Act took effect on 28 July 2016. It should
be noted that the primary objective of
these amendments is to provide Thailand
with a solid foundation to join the Madrid
Protocol by the end of 2016. The revised
Act has introduced amendments to the
trade mark registration process, extended
its protective scope and revised the
applicable deadlines and fees.
to the Act is as follows:
reduced from 90 days to 60 days. On
the other hand, the timeframe to pay
registration fees has increased from 30
days to 60 days;
whereas association of marks is no
longer required. Furthermore, under
the new amendments, a license
agreement will not be terminated from
the transfer or inheritance of the right
unless agreed otherwise;
trade mark legislation is that sound
marks are registrable if they are not
directly descriptive of the applied goods
or services. Likewise, shape marks are
now explicitly recognised in the new
Section 7 of the Act;
2016 onwards.