By Moeller IP.
The Argentinian Patent and Trademark Office published the Resolution Nr.16-2020 in the Electronic Official Bulletin of March 18, 2020, introducing the following notices:
Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19), to suspend until April 3, 2020, all terms related to summons, office actions, requirements or notifications, as well as legal or regulatory summons, office actions, requirements or notifications, being in progress at the date March 12, 2020.
The suspension of terms shall not prevent to consider as duly met, the acts that have been filed or are filed within the original term conferred. Such a measure may be extended, if the causes that motivated it, still exist.
We will continue to provide legal updates as needed and requested, to our clients and colleagues worldwide, and wish you to stay healthy and safe.
Please do not hesitate to contact us at any time with any doubt or questions you may have.
On January 29, to commemorate the International Data Protection Day, the control authorities of the countries of Argentina and Uruguay prepared a Guide for the study of Impact on the Personal Data Protection, whose main objectives are: 1) minimize the risks of projects faced by entities –publics and privates- that manage personal data; 2) the implementation and standardization of preventive rules to which these entities must comply when carrying out said projects; and 3) By developing an Impact Assessment, comply with current regulations on the matter.
The document begins by enunciating general concepts within which the one that stands out the most, is the meaning of ¨personal data¨ -because of its breadth-, encompassing all kinds of information, not only of individuals but also legal entities, in line with current regulations in the countries of Argentina and Uruguay.
Then, the need and importance of carrying out risk assessments that could affect personal data through its treatment is determined in the different projects or operations carried out by both public and private entities. These evaluations require going through different phases ranging from internal/operational matters, through regulations and security measures to be adopted, until finally reaching the preparation of the guide that will serve as the basis for the treatment of personal data that will be involved in the development of the activities carried out by the company.
Finally, and from the previous phases, the risk analysis that involves the development of the project or operation for the treatment of the data, through the phases of its development, is prepared. It should be noted that not only personal data is involved in any project, but other constitutional rights recognized such as the right to honor, self-image and privacy are collaterally achieved.
As a corollary, the implementation of an EIPD in each project that a company develops and that involves the use of personal data is necessary to fully comply with local regulations on data protection. In the event that the risks of data collection and processing are high, it should be weighed if the measures developed, manage to minimize them, or if, on the contrary, they also pose a high risk, to which alternative ways of managing the data should be sought. In this way, the law and its postulates comply.
By MoellerIP Team
National Institute of Industrial Property Resolution
City of Buenos Aires, October 21, 2019
In consideration of Law No. 22362 on Trademarks and Designations and modifications thereto , regulatory decree 242 dated April 1, 2019, Resolutions 214 of July 11, 2011, No. 266 of October 23, 2012, No. 250 of September 27, 2018, No. 123 of May 23, 2019, all of them issued by the NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY (INPI) and Disposition of former National Organism of industrial Property dated 13 June 1963 and
Article 10 of Annex to the regulatory decree 242/2019 establishes that the proceedings followed in respect to the Authority of Law 22362 on Trademarks and Designations and modifications thereto, must be filed with INPI.
Proceedings at INPI can be filed personally or through the INPI´s web page as per Resolution INPI No. P-266/12.
The filings entered personally in the Organism must be made through the forms corresponding to trademark application, trademark renewal and opposition, approved by Annex to Resolution INPI No. P-214/11, which have been further amended several times
Article 1 of Resolution No. P-250/2018 establishes that all cases before INPI shall be filed and followed electronically and shall be filed through INPI´S webpage.
Article 22 of Annex I (IF-2018-47346817-APN-DAL#INPI) of Resolution 250/2018 establishes that INPI shall digitize all filings made through paper and the proceeding shall continue by electronic means.
Forms completed through the webpage
When filings of new trademarks, renewals, and oppositions are entered through the webpage, users shall complete all information required.
Unlike paper forms which are filed personally in the Organism, forms completed through the webpage have different validations which prevent users from further completing the document when any essential, field has been left in blank reducing thus, the formal observations in this type of proceedings.
In addition, the display of new trademark applications, trademark renewals and oppositions filed by means of the webpage, are almost immediate.
In light of the above, it is necessary to implement a system allowing the electronic upload of the forms corresponding to new trademark applications, renewals and oppositions after which the user may choose to file them electronically or else, download and print them for filing personally at INPI.
The data entry through the webpage shall optimize INPI´s internal procedures and will expedite and improve the terms for the completion and granting of the rights claimed in each of the filings.
Registration of a new trademark
Those who wish to obtain the registration of a new trademark, must indicate the products and/or services to be distinguished by the corresponding sign.
By means of Disposition No. 3/61 of former National Organism of Industrial Property , in those cases where the applicant intends to distinguish all the articles of a class , it is not necessary to list all of them in the application, but simply indicate that the application is for all the articles of the class, with the expression “all class”.
Said norm had the aim of speeding up the formal evaluation of the trademark applications since with just mentioning the number of the Nice class plus the phrase “all class”, it was no longer necessary to examine the correct classification of all the products or services detailed in the application, and also control the correct publication of the sign in the Trademarks Bulletin.
Though the said aim was extremely useful in the past, nowadays there are numerous free tools available online which permit the easy classification of products and services pursuant to Nice Agreement.
In the last years said tools, in particular “TMclass” handled by the EUIPO, have been consulted and used permanently by the National Department of Trademarks and also, quoted as reference at the moment of objecting some incorrect classification of a product or service of a determined class
Furthermore, Trademark applicants have also started using these tools at the moment of applying for a trademark or to reply to some objection
In light of the foregoing it turns out to be appropriate to promote the use of these modern classification tools by the users of industrial property services in order to facilitate the selection of products or services through lists of terms internationally harmonized
The advantage of the system of individual selection of products and services facilitates competition in the market, since it prevents a TM applicant from protecting all the products or services contained within a class, which in many cases shall not be used in commerce
The data electronic upload system plus the implementation of this harmonized term tools (Tmclass) make the proceeding simpler for the user and optimize human and material resources in the institute, expediting in this way, the proceeding itself.
Although INPI promotes the use of tools that are helpful for the classification and considering there is no list contemplating the universality of all existing products and services, use of this tool is not restrictive for the above purpose, but it will also help the users to include other products or services intended to be protected by their trademarks , in which case INPI will then evaluate them formally by traditional means
Resolution NO.123 of May 23
Resolution No. 123 of May 23, 2019 approved through Annex thereto, the complementary regulations to Decree 242/19
With the aim of promoting the regulatory simplification it is appropriate to incorporate the present regulation within Annex of Resolution 123 of May 23, 2019
The NATIONAL TRADEMARKS OFFICE, DIGITAL AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY OFFICE, ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION OFFICE and LEGAL AFFAIRS OFFICE have taken the appropriate measuresRead More
New Domain Registration
Since last September, the first level domain ¨.AR¨ is available between the different registration options offered by the NIC Argentina, the national agency responsible for the administration of the domain name registry and the operation of the Domain Name System –DNS- in this country.
The registration of this new domain will be divided into three stages.
First Stage ¨Registration registration¨:
This stage that covers from September 11th to November 09th, will only be enabled to the owners of other domains registered before December 1st, 2015 – and that are still in force on August 27th, 2019- so that they also acquire the .AR domain over them.
Second Stage “Registration of Interest”:
This stage will begin on November 25, 2019, and will run until January 23, 2020. During this second period any person (both human and legal) will be allowed to request domain names available in .AR and in case of conflict over the same domain, the priority will be defined by lottery in the ¨City of Buenos Aires Lottery¨.
Third Stage “General Availability”:
Finally, from February 23, 2020 onwards, the .AR domain registration will be officially opened for the general public.
Through these three organized stages, NIC Argentina seeks to gradually offer domain names and avoid abuses with improper or speculative registration. Likewise, and for the same purpose, the domains registered in both, the first and second stages, will not be able to transfer to another owner for a period of two years from the date of registration.
Finally, it is important to highlight that each stage will have different registration fees. Therefore, if you are interested in the registration and advice for each stage our professionals are at your disposal to answer your questions and assist you according to your interests.
The European Patent Office and the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) of Argentina are stepping up their cooperation. EPO President Antonio Campino and INPI President Damaso Pardo signed on 2 July 2019 a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to establish a Reinforced Partnership programme between both offices. This comprehensive cooperation agreement is the first of its kind to be set up by the EPO with an IP office in Latin America. The meeting of the Heads of Office took place on the margins of the IP Executive Week in Alicante.
According to Antonio Campinos, thanks to this agreement, the EPO can work more closely with one of the largest economies in Latin America and strengthen its relations with this dynamic region. Building on EPO long-standing ties with INPI, the agreement will help better meet the needs of companies in Argentina and users around the globe.
According to Damaso Pardo, this agreement aims to render the respective patent systems as efficient, user-friendly and reliable as possible for innovators; a robust patent system is an essential instrument for stimulating innovation, entrepreneurship and economic development.
Through their Reinforced Partnership programme, the EPO and INPI will work together to achieve shared objectives such as ensuring that the patent systems in both regions offer the best possible services to innovating businesses and inventors in an effective manner in order to benefit the economy and society as a whole.
The Offices will also focus on a number of activities aimed at strengthening capacities in search and examination in emerging technologies fields such as the Internet of Things (IoT) and Industry 4.0, as well as capitalising on EPO work products, tools and standards.
The EPO and INPI have a long-standing history of cooperation. A previous MoU on technical cooperation was signed in Buenos Aires in May 2017, which will be replaced by the most recent MoU on Reinforced Partnership.
Source: www.epo.orgRead More
By INPI Argentina
DECTO-2019-403-APN-PTE – Decree Nº 260/1996 Amendment.
City of Buenos Aires, 6/5/2019
BY VIRTUE OF File Nº EX-2018-52897206-APN-DO#INPI of Law Nº 27,444 and Decree Nº 260 dated 20 March, 1996, and
That by Decree N° 260/96 the Ordered Text of the Law of Patents of Invention and Utility Models N° 24,481 was approved, with the amendments of Law N° 24,572, as Annex I.
That, likewise, through the above mentioned decree the Regulation of Law Nº 24,481 was approved, with the amendments introduced by Law Nº 24,572, as Annex II.
That, by Law Nº 27,444 of Simplification and Debureaucratization for the Productive Development of Nation, the amendments to the above mentioned rules were introduced.
That in order to guarantee the meeting with the objectives, it is necessary to fit the existing legal framework to the new approaches and requirements, in order to reduce the burdens on the applicants, to shorten the proceeding terms, to urge the debureaucratization in proceedings and the adoption of new management electronic tools.
That in that order, it is proposed to design a creative and innovating proceeding for the protection by the institute of the utility model, emphasizing the celerity thereof in light of the importance of the protection of innovation for entrepreneurs as well as for Micro, Small and Medium Companies.
That through the present decree, a higher quality of service supply is assured, by establishing transparent and simple proceedings, facilitating the access of public in general to the registration of intangibles, in order to perform remote proceedings before the NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY (INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE LA PROPIEDAD INDUSTRIAL (INPI)), an independent organism within the area of the MINISTRY OF PRODUCTION AND WORK.
That within this framework, it is applicable to amend Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated 20 March, 1996.
The GENERAL DIRECTION OF LEGAL AFFAIRS of the MINISTRY OF PRODUCTION AND WORK has taken the intervention of its competence.
That the present decree is issued in the exercise of granted responsibilities to the NATIONAL EXECUTIVE POWER by article 99, item 2 of NATIONAL CONSTITUTION.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE ARGENTINEAN NATION
ARTICLE 1°.- To substitute article 12 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 12.- In order to be granted a patent, the applicant must complete, within the terms specified for each case in the Law or in this Regulation, the following information and documentation:
- a) A patent application which should include:
1) An affidavit through which a patent of invention is formally applied for;
2) Complete name of the applicant or the applicants;
3) CUIT, CUIL, CDI and nationality of applicant(s), or registration data when the case is of a legal person. In the case of a human person, the data for the identification of the spouse, when applicable;
4) Real and electronic address of the applicant/s;
5) Complete name of the inventor or the inventors, as applicable;
6) Real address of the inventor or the inventors, as applicable;
7) Title of the invention;
8) Number of patent (or patent application) for which the filed application is additional (if applicable);
9) Number of patent application for which the filed application is divisional (if applicable);
10) When the submission is performed under Law N° 17,011 (PARIS CONVENTION), data of the priority or priorities claimed in patent application: (Country, number and date of filing of foreign application or applications). In the event the applicant does not have the number of foreign priority or priorities by the moment of national application, they may be stated at any moment within THREE (3) months from the filing of national application.
Within the same term, the Application Authority may request the translation into the national language in electronic or digital format when the priority document/s are in another language;
11) Complete name and address of the institution depositing the microorganism, date of deposit and registration number assigned to the microorganism by the applicant institution, when patent application refers to a microorganism;
12) Complete name of the person or the industrial property agent authorized to proceed with patent application;
13) Identity document number of the authorized person or license number of the authorized industrial property agent or general attorney to represent the applicant;
- b) A technical description of the invention, headed by the title of the invention, in agreement with the one appearing in the application, which should include:
1) A description of technical field to which the invention belongs;
2) A description of the prior art in this matter, known by the inventor, and preferably stating the literature documents;
3) A detailed and complete description of the invention, highlighting the advantages over the known prior art, understandable to a person skilled in the art;
4) A brief description of figures included in drawings, if any.
- c) One or more claims;
- d) Technical drawings needed for the comprehension of the invention referred to in the specification;
- e) A summary of the description of the invention;
- f) Deposit certificate for the microorganism issued by the holder institution, when applicable;
- g) When a priority is claimed, the assignment document should be included along with their translation, if applicable, in electronic or digital format.”
ARTICLE 2°.- The following should be incorporated as text of article 14 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996:
“ARTICLE 14.- The priority right claimed at the application moment will serve as an affidavit. When requested by the NATIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF PATENTS at the substantial examination stage, the applicant will have a THREE (3)-month term to include, in electronic or digital format, the priority document or documents and the assignment documents. The Enforcement Authority may require the translation/s of the priority document/s invoked in the application any time they are not in the national language, within THREE (3) months from the date the application was filed.
The non-meeting with the requirements stated in the present article will consider the invoked priority right as cancelled.”
ARTICLE 3°.- To substitute article 19 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 19.- The applicant may submit complements, corrections and amendments, up to THIRTY (30) running days as from the date of patent application, any time this does not imply a an extension of the original application.”
ARTICLE 4°.- To substitute article 24 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 24.- After NINETY (90) running days from the patent application, the Commissioner of Patents will order the performance of a preliminary examination within a term of TWENTY (20) running days.
The application will be definitely denied if, within the term of THIRTY (30) running days counted from the notification, the applicant does not solve the comments stated by the NATIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF PATENTS in its preliminary examination. In case no response is filed within the stated term, the application will be considered abandoned.”
ARTICLE 5°.- To substitute article 27 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 27.- I.- To perform the substantial examination of the application, the following conditions should be met:
- a) The preliminary examination should be approved,
- b) The application is published in the patent bulletin,
- c) The term established in the last paragraph of article 28 of Law N° 24,481 (o. t. 1996), as well as its amendments, is met for the submission of comments from third parties; and
- d) That the substantial examination fee is paid.
II.- The substantial examination will include the following steps:
- a) Seek for antecedents. The examiner will seek to identify, as his/her judgment makes it possible or reasonable, the documents he/she considers necessary to determine if the invention is new or if it implies inventive activity. His/her seek will include all technical areas that may contain elements corresponding to the invention, and the following documentation should be checked:
1) National patent documents (patents and utility models granted or under proceeding);
2) Published patent application or patents from other countries;
3) Technical literature different from the one stated in prior items which would be pertinent for analysis.
- b) Examination. The examiner will investigate, whenever necessary and taking into account the search for antecedents, if the application totally satisfies the requirements of the Law and this Regulation.
III.- If necessary, the examiner may require:
- a) Within the term of THIRTY (30) running days from the requirement notification, a copy of the scientific documentation he considers pertinent and/or a copy of the substantial examination performed to the same invention by foreign patent offices.
- b) Specific reports related with the subject matter of the invention to investigators working at Universities or Scientific or Technological Investigation Institutes.”
ARTICLE 6°.- To substitute article 29 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 29.- When the formulated objections are not satisfactorily solved by the applicant within a term of THIRTY (30) running days, the examiner, after a founded report, will be able to suggest the NATIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF PATENTS the denial of the application. If no response is submitted by the applicant within the stated term, the patent will be denied immediately.”
ARTICLE 7°.- To substitute article 30 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 30.- If, as a result of the substantial examination, the examiner determines that the invention meets the legal and regulatory requirements to be granted a patent and, consequently, the issued comments have been satisfactorily solved, he/she will issue a report within the term of TEN (10) days a report to the Commissioner of Patents with his/her advice, who will issue a sentence within THIRTY (30) subsequent days.
Once the resolution granting or denying the granting of the letters patent is sentenced, the applicant should be duly notified.
If the resolution is negative, there will be a THIRTY (30)-day term for the submission of the resource foreseen in article 72 of Law N° 24,481 (o. t. 1996) and amendments.
The Enforcement Authority will arrange the Electronic Registry of granted Patents.”
ARTICLE 8°.- To substitute article 32 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 32.- The publication of the granting of a patent of invention and the utility model will include the following information:
- a) The number of the granted patent or utility model;
- b) The class or classes in which the patent or the utility model is included;
- c) The first and last name or the corporate name of the applicant and, if it is the case, of the inventor, as well as their domicile;
- d) The title of the granted patent or utility model which will include the specification, claims and drawings if applicable;
- e) The date for the granting of the application; and
- f) The expiration date”
ARTICLE 9°.- To substitute article 37 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 37.- Then an application of a patent of invention is assigned, the requirements established by the Enforcement Authority should be met.
The holder of a patent will, as from the granting date, be able to request the NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY to publish it as a Patent Opened to Voluntary Licensing.”
ARTICLE 10.- To substitute article 51 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 51.- The application to an obligatory license for an addition patent granted by the NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY, by founded resolution, with previous technical or economical certification of the upgrading of the invention. The resolutions sentenced within the framework of this article will be susceptible of the resources foreseen in the last paragraph of article 42 of this Regulation.”
ARTICLE 11.- To substitute article 55 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 55.- It will be considered that the invention novelty has not been broken when the applicant has disclosed the invention object of the utility model abroad within TWELVE (12) months prior to the submission of the corresponding application in ARGENTINA. The “industrial character” will be understood as “industrial application” pursuant to article 4°, item e) of Patent Law.
ARTICLE 12.- Incorporate the following as the text of article 56 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996:
“ARTICLE 56.- The enforcement Authority will be able to solve the utility model application, after THIRTY (30) running days from the filing date without accompanying the document stated in article 56 of Law N° 24,481 (o. t. 1996) and amendments.”
ARTICLE 13.- Incorporate the following as the text of article 57 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996:
“ARTICLE 57.- When de application is performed under Law N° 17,011 (PARIS CONVENTION), the applicant should include, within the term of THREE (3) months from the filing of the application, and in electronic or digital format, the priority document and the assignment document, if applicable, along with their translations in the national language. In case these requirements are not met in the stated term, the priority right will be declined.
The Enforcement Authority will be in charge of establishing the proceeding and the conditions under which the meeting with requirements contemplated in articles 53 and 55 of Law N° 24,481 (o. t. 1996) and amendments will be performed.”
ARTICLE 14.- To substitute article 72 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 72.- The submission of an appeal as established in article 72 of Law N° 24,481 (o. t. 1996) and amendments, will not grant the qualification for other administrative or judicial resources that may be pertinent by the application of the rules of Law or of Law N° 19,549, its amendments and the Administrative Proceeding Regulation, Decree 1759/72 – O. T. 2017.”
ARTICLE 15.- To substitute article 94 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the following:
“ARTICLE 94.- The NATIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF PATENTS will be in charge of:
- a) The management, study and resolution of the applications for the granting of patents and utility models.
- b) Knowing about nullity proceedings for applications and cancellation of granted patents and utility models.
- c) Issue certificates and authorized copies of documents contained in files under its jurisdiction.
- d) Issue reports and draft statistics on the functioning, activities and performance of the office.
- e) Notify about its resolution and proceeding acts through the means determined by the Enforcement Authority.
- f) Act along with the DIRECTION OF LEGAL AFFAIRS of the NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY, for the appropriate application of international covenants on this matter.”
ARTICLE 16.- To substitute article 98 of Annex II of Decree Nº 260 dated March 20, 1996, by the:
“ARTICLE 98.- The authorization for the elaboration and marketing of pharmaceutical products should be required before the Governmental Secretary of Health of the MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT, and regarding agrochemical products, before the Governmental Secretary of Agricultural Industry of the MINISTRY OF PRODUCTION AND WORK.”
ARTICLE 17.- The present decree will be in force after SIXTY (60) running days from publication in the Official Bulletin.
ARTICLE 18.- Be it communicated, published, submitted before the NATIONAL DIRECTION OF OFFICIAL REGISTRY and filed. MACRI – Marcos Peña – Dante Sica
- 06/06/2019 N° 40234/19 v. 6/6/2019
Application date 6/6/2019
Source: www.inpi.gob.arRead More
By INPI Argentina
Moeller IP Advisors kindly informs to clients and friends that on May 27, 2019, the INPI Resolution No. 123/2019 was published, clarifying the recent modifications of our Trademark Law and its regulatory decree.
By this Resolution, the following is determined:
- Multiclass applications are not allowed. Trademark applications should be filed indicating only one class of the Nice Classification.
- The obligation of filing a Declaration of Use falls only upon trademarks and trademark renewals granted as of January 12, 2013.-
- A grace period of up until January 12, 2020 is stablished to comply with the submission of the Declaration of Use for trademarks and trademark renewals granted between January 12, 2013 and January 12, 2014.- Further information regarding the Declaration of Use may be found
- Trademark renewal applications may be filed as from 6 months prior to the expiration date and up to 6 additional months from said date.
- The notification system of our TM Office remains the same until further regulation is issued regarding electronic notifications.
- Two extension of term of 10 and 5 days is automatically granted to the ordinary 30 days term for replying to an Official Action provided that the corresponding fee is duly paid.
Important information regarding Declaration of Use in Argentina
Filing of Declaration of Use mandatory. Term
The obligation of filing a Declaration of Use (DOU) falls only upon trademarks and trademark renewals granted as of January 12, 2013.- The DOU should be filed as from the 5th anniversary of validity up until the 6th anniversary of validity, together with the payment of the corresponding fee.
Grace period for filing Declaration of Use
A grace period of up to January 12, 2020 is stablished to comply with the submission of the DOU for trademarks and trademark renewals granted between January 12, 2013 and January 12, 2014.-
If the DOU is not submitted in due time, it could be later on filed provided that an additional fee is paid or each year of delay.
Proof of use
The submission of proof of use is not required. Filing of the DOU, executed by Moeller IP in representation of their clients, is sufficient.
Use of marks
The mark that was not used in the first 5 years becomes vulnerable to cancellation due to lack of use. However, the mark would not be lost unless the cancellation is been declared at the request of a third party. The subsequent use regularizes the use situation of the mark.
If the mark is used only for some products in the class, the products that were not used would be vulnerable due to lack of use. However, this would not affect the validity of the registration for all the products it protects unless there is a cancellation request filed by a third party.
If the mark is used for products or services in other classes of the Nice Classification, this use would suffice to preserve the validity of a registration provided that said products or services are related to the class in question. The same goes in case the mark is used to designate activities related to the products or services protected by the registration.
We hope this information is clarifying and Moeller’s team remains available for any information or clarifications you may need. If you have any questions please reach out to us via firstname.lastname@example.org
Echoes of the New Copyright Directive approved by the European Parliament last month extend to the other side of the pond. That is why, taking advantage of the popularity achieved by the new community copyright reforms for Internet platforms, the Argentine Society of Management of Performing Actors of Argentina (Sagai) announced the launch of a new campaign to demand from them, specifically YouTube, the enforcement of the National Intellectual Property Law.
In this regard, it is important to remark that the aforementioned entity filed a lawsuit with YouTube (whose parent company is Google) 4 years ago for the lack of payment to actors when that platform uploads national series and films (only claim in the world made by a entity of this type). The form of collection to which Sagai aspires is a percentage, regulated by the Argentine Government through the Intellectual Property Law. That is why, according to their representatives, they are very close to the initiative approved in the European Parliament.
As mentioned in another post of this blog1, the new European directive imposes the use of filters to stop the load of content that may have copyright (as opposed to how it works now, where the analysis is done after it was online and before someone’s complaint). These new measures have generated voices in favor (to prevent large platforms from profiting from the effort of others), as against (which they see as a form of censorship).
In this sense, for Sagai, YouTube has some control of the contents that are uploaded to its platform by users because, according to the lawyer Sebastian Bloj, director of Sgai, “it is unfair that the company says that it has no responsability for those contents when we believe that is not true. If we want to see ¨Lost¨ or any ¨Disney movie¨ or any ¨American film¨ we will not find it on the Net¨. On the other hand, Google issued a statement in which it states that “YouTube respects copyright and makes great efforts to combat piracy worldwide and Argentina is no exception.”.
In conclusion, this local proposal does not seek the sanction of a new copyright law, as happened in Europe, if not the State to enforce the one currently in force in Argentina. As Jorge Marrale, head of the aforementioned entity, points out “there is an idea that the Internet is for everyone, and it is very good, it is free, but not free.”
1 ¨European Union Approves Copyright Directive¨, by Maria Sol Porro, 23 APRIL, 2019, (https://www.moellerip.com/european-union-approves-copyright-directive/)Read More
The Argentine INPI has published on 29 April 2019 Resolution 112/2019 with the objective to accelerate substantive examination of Argentine first filing patent applications.
The text of said resolution is the following:
SEEN the file EX -2019-16551501- -APN-DOINPI, of the Law of Patents of Invention and Utility Models N° 24,481 (t. o. 1996), as amended by laws Nos. 24,572, 25,859 and 27,444, and by the Regulatory Decree N° 260 dated March 20, 1996, Annex II; and
That, today, Argentina is undergoing a transformation and modernization process which aims to an economy growth based on the incorporation of local and world value chains, regarding innovation as the main axis of the productive development.
That, in this frame, the protection of innovations through the system of patents of invention and utility models fulfills a significant role in the competitiveness of firms, especially our PYMES (Small and Medium Sized Companies, from the acronym in Spanish), which invest in innovation and request to protect cash advances and inventions to be afterwards apply to an industrial development.
That this INSTITUTE is adopting several measures, starting with the reform to the proceedings of Patent Law, so that the applicants are granted all the corresponding registration with higher celerity, efficiency and quality and especially within the field of patents of inventions and utility models, being aware that the simplification of processes enhances competitiveness and has a strong impact in the saving of fees and costs to the applicant.
That, within the frame of the proposed actions, the creation of a program of Priority Patent Examination (PEP) is relevant, when the first regular application of patent is performed in Argentina.
That the Priority Patent Examination (PEP) will result in a proceeding rule to early access to a substantial examination, subject to the meeting with certain conditions, but that this does not imply any change to substantial rules of current ruling on this matter.
That the NATIONAL PATENT ADMINISTRATION and the DIRECTION OF LEGAL AFFAIRS have intervened, as applicable.
That this document is issued pursuant to the authority conferred by Article 92 item k) of Law N° 24,481, as amended by Law N° 27,444.
For this reason,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY DECIDES:
ARTICLE 1°.- To create, within the frame of the National Patent Administration (ANP) the program of Priority Patent Examination (PEP).
ARTICLE 2°.- The program will be applicable to those patent application that meet the following conditions:
a) the first regular filing of patent of invention application has been performed in Argentina;
b) the application is published in the patent bulletin of this Institute;
c) the third party objection period is expired,
d) the substantial examination fee has been paid;
e) the corresponding substantial examination has not been performed;
f) no other accelerated proceeding has been required for the same application.
ARTICLE 3°.- The applicant who wants to apply to the PEP should complete the form attached as annex IF N° IF- 2019-39703985-APN-INPI#MPYT to this resolution and at the same time the following should be submitted:
a) a national and international search report issued by the Direction of Technological Information and Documentation of INPI;
b) an affidavit of not having filed the invention object of the PEP program in another patent office before;
c) in the case the applicant is a small and medium sized firm, the proof certificate therefor; and
d) the payment of the fee for the application of the present priority examination.
ARTICLE 4°.- After the requirements of the previous articles are met, the patent office will decide on suitability within SIXTY (60) running dates, as from the request date.
ARTICLE 5°.- The present program will extend for a term of three (3) years, from the enforcement of this resolution, to be extended for equal and successive periods.
ARTICLE 6°.- The present resolution will be in force after THIRTY (30) days from the date it is published in the Official Bulletin.
ARTÍCULO 7°.- Be this registered, notified and sent to the National Direction of Official Registration for publishing in the Official Bulletin for the term of (1) day, and after being met, be it published in the Patent Bulletin, with a copy in the notification board, on the web of INPI and then be it filed.
Source: www.boletinoficial.gov.arRead More
As we mentioned in previous articles, compared to the changes in Personal Data that the European Union experienced last year, both at the community level and at the national level, due to the sanction of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDRP), many Latin American countries began to modify their own laws, not only to comply with the regulations in the cases in which the same are applicable to them but also to be in accordance with this wave of modernization and strengthening.
In the specific case of Argentina, a bill was recently presented to Congress that would replace the Personal Data Protection Law No. 25,326, which has been in force since 2000, in an attempt to align the data protection standards of the country with the GDPR. Furthermore, through Resolution 159/2018, published in the Official Gazette dated December 5th, 2018, the modification of the personal data protection authority was arranged, replacing the National Directorate for the Protection of Personal Data by the Agency of Access to Public Information (known as ¨AAIP¨ in Spanish).
It is in this context of continuous changes in data protection in Argentina and while awaiting the treatment in the National Congress of the new law mentioned, that on January 16th, 2019, it was published in the Official Gazette the Resolution No. 4/2019 called “Guiding criteria and indicators of best practices in the application of Law No. 25,326”. This recent resolution issued by the AAIP aims to unify the criteria of the agency for the correct interpretation and implementation of the current regulations on the protection of personal data, whose observance is mandatory “for all those subjects reached by Law No. 25.326ii. Then we will explain the established criteria:
1. Right of access to personal data collected through video surveillance systems
This criterion refers to the guidelines that must be applied to a request that the owner of the data demands in order to access their personal data (in this case her/his personal image) which were collected through video surveillance systems.
In other words, anyone who wants to access their image (personal data) collected through video surveillance systems must prove their identity and indicate the approximate date and time at which their image could have been captured, as well as provide the necessary information to identify it. For its part, the person responsible for the database must provide the personal data clearly, accompanied by an explanation of the duration of the registration, place of image registration, purpose, eventual assignments, destination of the data and indicate if the data bank is registered with the AAIP.
Basically this point aims to regulate the video surveillance systems and the image of the people taken by these devices, which is cataloged as “personal data”. In this way, according to the current system, the means of video surveillance must be registered as a database before the AAIP, an obligation that, on the other hand, is eliminated in the Project to amend the Personal Data Law.
2. Automated Data Processing
This criterion deals with the right of the owner of the data to ask the database officer for an explanation regarding the logic applied to the automated processing of their data, when such treatment causes a prejudice, that is, pernicious legal effects or affect her/him significantly in a negative way.
Within this point it is important to highlight that the automated data processing and its correlative right to obtain information about it is stipulated in GDPR. However, in the GDPR, the principle of making decisions which evaluates personal aspects of a person and that are based merely on an automated treatment is prohibited, unless it is specifically permitted by the European Union or by a Member State or that the holder has given his explicit consent.
3. Data dissociation
To understand this criterion, it is necessary to begin with the point of when the Argentine personal data regime is applicable. In this way, Law 25.236, in its article 2, establishes that the regulations apply to “information of any kind referring to physical persons or ideal existence determined or determinable”. Therefore, the information obtained that can not be associated to a determined or determinable person will not be protected as a ¨protected data¨ in the terms of the Argentine regime.
In this sense, the resolution establishes that it will not be considered “information related to a determinable person”, under the terms of Article 2 of Law No. 25,326, the one whose procedure applied to achieve its identification requires the application of disproportionate or non-viable measures or deadlines.
However, this point generates certain legal gaps since it is not defined precisely when a measure or term is disproportionate or unfeasible.
4. Biometric data
Like Article 2 of Law 25,236 and Article 4 of the GDRP, the new resolution also defines “biometric data” as “those personal data obtained from a specific technical treatment, related to physical, physiological or behavior of a human person, that allow or confirm their unique identification¨.
In this sense, it establishes that the biometric data of a person will be considered sensitive data when they reveal data that may be discriminatory for the owner (for example, data that reveal ethnic origin or health information).
In art. 5 of Law 25,236 establishes that ¨the treatment of personal data is illegal when the owner has not given his free, express and informed consent, which must be recorded in writing, or by any other means that allows him to be equated, according to the circumstances¨.
Therefore, in line with the provisions of the GDRP and ahead of what will be discussed in the new bill on data protection, the Resolution adds in this criterion that the person responsible for the database must have effective identity validation mechanisms that prove that the person who has given the consent is actually the owner of the data and not a third party, leaving ample margin to the information officers of the databases to apply for those mechanisms that are most convenient for them.
6. Consent cession between Public Organisms
In relation to what is established in the previous generic criterion about consent, the resolution specifically regulates the case of consent between Public Organizations, stating that the consent of the owner of the data will not be required, provided that:
(i) the assignor has obtained the data in the exercise of its functions;
(ii) the transferee uses the data for a purpose that is within the scope of its competence and;
(iii) the data are adequate and do not exceed the limit of what is necessary in relation to the latter purpose.
7. Consent of minors
Finally, and in harmony with the Civil and Commercial Code of the Nation and the gradual capacity that this establishes, it is established that the minor may give informed consent for the treatment of their personal data taking into account their psychophysical characteristics, aptitudes and development, so that if the minor does not possess the sufficient capacity to give the informed consent, the holder of the parental responsibility or guardianship must give the consent for the treatment.
Faced with all these developments in data protection that Argentina has been experiencing in a short period of time, we consider that it is valid to understand that all these changes aim to maintain the title of a ¨safe country¨ for the processing of personal data, that the aforementioned country has obtained over the past few, according to international standards protection of the confidentiality and integrity of the information that contains personal data throughout the treatment process (from collection to destruction years . Therefore, we believe that we will have interesting news about the analyzed sector in Argentina during the course of this year.
i ¨ Wave of Personal Data Updates in Latam¨, By Maria Sol Porro, 29 JANUARY, 2019 (Link: https://www.moellerip.com/wave-of-personal-data-updates-in-latam/); ¨Significant Fines for Infringement of the Data Protection Law¨, By Maria Sol Porro, 6 MARCH, 2019 (Link: https://www.moellerip.com/significant-fines-for-infringement-of-the-data-protection-law/).
ii Law Nª 25326, 04/10/2000, article 1: The present law has the objective of the integral protection of the personal data settled in archives, registries, data banks, or other technical means of data processing, be they public, or private destined to give reports, to guarantee the right to the honor and privacy of the people, as well as access to the information registered about them, in accordance with the provisions of article 43, third paragraph of the National Constitution. The provisions of this law will also be applicable, insofar as it is pertinent, to the data relating to persons of ideal existence. In no case may the database or journalistic information sources be affected.Read More