Select Country

Select a country to view information on local trademark law

A-E  F-J  K-O  P-T  U-Z

Multinational Agreements

Get Listed

Promote your expertise to IP professionals worldwide.
read more

Show Articles

Subscribe to Free Newsletter

To keep updated on the latest amendments to international trademark laws click here


Print this page
Peter W. Choe, Gowling WLG, Canada
First published on

Promotional use is not use of a trademark

Peter W. Choe, Gowling WLG, Canada , First published on www.gowlingwlg.comIn a recent decision of the Federal Court in Riches, McKenzie & Herbert LLP v. Cosmetic Warriors Limited (2018 FC 63) available here, Justice Manson allowed the appeal of the decision of the Registrar of Trademarks, thus overturning the finding that the Respondent had demonstrated use of the trademark LUSH in association with t-shirts. Cosmetic Warriors (the “Respondent”) owns the  read more

Chew Kherk Ying, Wong & Partners, Malaysia
Woo Wai Teng, Wong & Partners, Malaysia
First published on

Malaysian Federal Court Rules On The Evidence of Non-Us...

Chew Kherk Ying, Wong & Partners, Malaysia, Woo Wai Teng, Wong & Partners, Malaysia, First published on www.wongpartners.comAt the first instance of the delicious saga of Oishi Group Public Company Ltd v Liwayway Marketing Corporation [2015] 2 CLJ 1121, Oishi Group Public Company Ltd ("Oishi"), a manufacturer and producer of beverages bearing the OISHI mark, had successfully expunged Liwayway Marketing Corporation's ("Liwayway") OISHI mark in Class 30 and 43 from the Register of Trade Marks ("Register"). The order for expungement is premised on the following grounds on non-use under Section 46 of the Malaysian Trade Marks Act 1976 ("the Act"); and that the entries were made without sufficient cause and wrongfully remained on the Register - the term OISHI relates to surnames of prominent Japanese, bears reference to the goods i.e. food and drinks, and has a well known dictionary meaning. The High Court held that Oishi had established a prima facie case of non-use via the market survey report and Liwayway failed to prove use. The invoices provided by Liwayway in support of the use of the mark was rejected as  read more

Robert L. Eisenbach III, Of Counsel, Cooley LLP, USA
First published on

Throwing Shade At Sunbeam: Following Lubrizol And Not T...

Robert L. Eisenbach III, Of Counsel, Cooley LLP, USA, First published on www.lexology.comThe Tempnology Trademark Saga: When it comes to decisions on bankruptcy and trademark licenses, the In re Tempnology LLC bankruptcy case is the gift that keeps on giving. It all started in November 2015. Following Tempnology’s rejection of an agreement containing a trademark licensee, the New Hampshire Bankruptcy Court ruled that the licensee could no longer use the licensed trademarks. The Bankruptcy Court followed the Fourth Circuit’s 1985 decision in Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers read more

Anca Draganescu-Pinawin, IP Counsel, Novagraaf, Switzerland
First published on

Asian characters: a good fit for trademarks in the EU?

Anca Draganescu-Pinawin, IP Counsel, Novagraaf, Switzerland, First published on www.novagraaf.comHow is a trademark containing or composed solely of Asian characters assessed in the EU? This question is especially of interest to Asia-based businesses seeking to bring their brands to the EU market while retaining the corporate identity that they have developed in their home countries. While the question can be put simply enough, the answer turns out to be more complex. From the standpoint of a counsel advising a business on how best to protect such a mark when entering the EU market, several headache-inducing questions may come up  read more

Vanessa Costantini, Associate, Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C., USA
First published on

How you should use a registered trademark or service ma...

Vanessa Costantini, Associate, Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C., USA, First published on www.lexology.comHere are some guidelines on how to use your registered mark to best legal advantage. You should always use your mark as an adjective – not as a noun or verb. By definition, marks are source identifiers. They are brand names, not products or services. If a mark is misused, it runs the risk of being considered generic and no longer functioning to indicate a particular source. This distinction is simple, but it is significant because systematic use of a trademark as a noun may lead to that mark becoming the common product read more

Hui Wang, Xu Li and Nicholas DeFeo, Chofn Intellectual Property, China
First published on
Show Partner Info

Recent Court Decision: A Significant Blow to GUI Design...

Hui Wang, Xu Li and Nicholas DeFeo, Chofn Intellectual Property, China, First published on http://en.chofn.comMay 2016, Plaintiffs Beijing Qihu technology co. LTD and Qizhi software (Beijing) co. LTD sued Beijing Jiangmin technology co. LTD on the grounds of infringement of their design patent “computer with GUI”, requiring a cease to the infringing behavior and claiming 5 million RMB in damages. However, after a one and a half year’s trial, on 25th December, the judge made the decision in the first instance on grounds of there being no direct or indirect infringement based on the fact that the defendant’s infringing product is a piece of software not a “computer”, namely, the two products are neither the same nor similar. Since May 2014, China has allowed the application for GUI design patents, and the number of applications is increasing rapidly. It is well known that the core technology of GUI design patents is the interface itself. GUI is a software product which can be implemented on different hardware or devices, and its core content to be protected is not related to carriers. However, under the current Chinese Patent Law, and according to regulations of Chinese Patent Examination Guideline, partial design is not allowed  read more

Pietro Gambaro, Trevisan & Cuonzo Avvocati, Italy
First published on

Registering non-traditional trademarks under the new EU...

Pietro Gambaro, Trevisan & Cuonzo Avvocati, Italy, First published on www.lexology.comOn 1 October 2017, an additional set of rules concerning EU trademarks under EU Regulation 2015/2424 amending EU Regulation 207/2009, and codified under EU Regulation 2017/1001 (hereinafter EUTMR), came into effect. The former provisions required that, in order to obtain registration, a trademark had to be capable of: i) being represented graphically; ii) distinguishing the goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings. By abolishing the requirement of graphical representation, the reform aims  read more

CHOFN Intellectual Property

Tingxi HUO

Tingxi HUO
B316 Guangyi Plaza, 5 Guangyi Str., Xicheng
100053 Beijing
China (CN)
Tel +86 10 6213 9699
Fax +86 10 6213 1230

Mr. Tingxi Huo, former trademark partner and leader of another Chinese IP firm, Peksung’s, trademark team, is now heading Chofn’s trademark team. Chofn, a veritable “one-stop IP shop”, is one of China’s leading firms with 19 offices in 17 cities.

Professional Team:
• 400+ patent attorneys & engineers
• 300+ trademark attorneys
• 40+ litigators
• 1400+ staff

IP Services:
• Prosecution
• Litigation
• Search
• Transaction
• Research & Training
• IP Software

Awards (selective):
• Trademark Agency of Excellence
• Outstanding IP Litigation Team in China
• ASIA IP Expert
• WTR 1000
• WIPR Leaders 2016 China