On September, 12 2014, the Federal Court of Australia delivered a further decision in a long-running dispute between leading Australian swimwear business Seafolly and swimwear designer, Leah Madden (trading as White Sands Swimwear).
On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari in the case of Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank to decide whether the issue of trademark “tacking” should be determined by a jury as a question
In a much anticipated ruling, the Third Circuit held courts no longer may presume irreparable harm when considering a preliminary injunction motion in a Lanham Act false advertising case even where a plaintiff shows a likelihood of success on the
Last year we reported on the release of a new voluntary labeling system for packaged foods by the Australian Government. The Health Star Rating system (HSR) provides a fast and simple representation of the saturated fat, sodium and sugar content
Question: What’s the difference between US$600,000 and US$14 million in a contempt action? Answer: Presumption of consumer reliance, according to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Federal Trade Commission v. BlueHippo Funding, LLC.
The case began in 2003,
The UK Intellectual Property Offices warns trade mark owners to not be fooled by “‘renewal’ notices to holders of UK registered patents and trade marks offering to renew the rights for fees greatly in excess of the official renewal fees.”
A Northern District Court recently told plaintiff’s counsel that merely alleging that a product contains ingredients that are not “natural”, without supplying any objective definition of natural, will not allow such claims to move past the pleading stage.
On August
A trade mark application for “FriendBook” has been refused by the Australian Trade Marks Office, following a successful opposition from Facebook.
Australian company Northsword Pty Ltd filed an application on 19 February 2012 for the word mark “FriendBook” in
On July 10, 2014 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down its judgment following a reference from the German Bundespatentgericht in the Apple Inc. v Deutsches Patent-und Markenamt registry proceedings.
In a landmark