Search results for

In an appeal from the US Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Scott v Koyama, 61 USPQ 2d 1856 (Fed Cir Feb 27 2002)), an interference between a party (Koyama) that filed a patent application in Japan on March 13 1990 and a party (Scott) whose UK patent application was filed on March 29 1990, the Federal Circuit was faced with a situation in which neither party could rely on its actual reduction to practice of the invention. This was because the work was performed outside the US, and the applications were filed before January 1 1996. Had they been filed after that date, a statute (35 USC 104) permits the introduction of evidence concerning work performed anywhere in the world.

? China: An appeal court in Shanghai has banned seven former Unilever employees from appealing any further against a verdict finding them guilty of making fake shampoo worth Rmb1.27 million

James Nurton, London

Russia's transition to a market economy has created a tangle of proprietary rights. Valeri Guerman explains some of the problems facing trade mark owners

Interview: James Rogan James Rogan, the new director of the USPTO, speaks to Sam Mamudi about being at the helm of one of the most influential IP organizations in the world at a time of enormous challenge and growth

There are grounds under the UK Trade Marks Act (1994, section 3(6)) for refusal or invalidity of registration where a trade mark is applied for in bad faith. The provision derives from the European Trade Marks Harmonization Directive (89/104) and has a counterpart in EU Trade Mark Regulation 40/94 (article 51(1)(b)). Bad faith is not defined and its scope has produced a divide between UK and EU case law over the need for subjective dishonesty on the part of the trade mark applicant (Trillium, First Cancellation Division of OHIM, C000053447/1, March 28 2000).

James Nurton, Brussels

The German Trademark Act (section 8(2)) states that trade marks cannot be registered in the following situations:

Stephen Whybrow, CMS Cameron McKenna, London

One of the key issues in the complex of problems surrounding exhaustion is the question of whether goods bearing the mark of a trade mark owner have been put on the market with that owner's consent. If so, the trade mark owner cannot prohibit parallel-importers from importing the goods into the EEA, according to article 7, section 1 of the Harmonization Directive (89/104/EEC).