On November 7, 2013, the IIT Chicago-Kent Intellectual Property Law Society (IPLS) hosted its third annual Gastro-Intellectual Property Law Symposium. This year’s conference focused on “Taste Embargo: What Will Happen When the Cuban Embargo Is Lifted?” The Gastro-IP conference is a signature event of IPLS that analyzes pressing issues at the intersection of IP and food.
Intellectual property experts analyzed a range of issues related to intellectual property and the U.S. embargo on Cuban goods, including cigars, rum and coffee. The WTO decision involving Havana Club Rum–and the U.S.’s failure to correct its violations of the TRIPS Agreement for more than a decade–were discussed at length, as well as how 5,000 U.S. companies have managed to register trademarks in Cuba.
Professor Christopher Buccafusco moderated the discussion before a packed audience. Panelists Judith Grubner of Arnstein & Lehr LLP, Joseph Schmidt of Shefsky & Froelich, and Mariano Municoy of Moeller IP Advisors in Argentina discussed the history of the embargo, some of the litigation that has occurred since the embargo went into effect, and what might happen when the embargo ends. A reception followed the lively talk as attendees enjoyed catering provided by 90 Miles Cuban Cafe …
New guidelines for the examination of patent applications (related to chemical-pharmaceutical inventions) were approved in Joint resolution No. 118/2012, 546/2012 and 107/2012 (Ministry of Industry, Ministry of Health and National Institute for Industrial Property). This resolution was published in the Official Bulletin on May 8, 2012 and entered into force on May 9, 2012.
Hereinafter, you will find a summary of patentability criteria introduced by the new guidelines.
- The processes for the obtention of enantiomers, if novel and inventive, may be patentable if they are clearly described in the specification and the result obtained therewith is sufficiently disclosed in the description.
- Compounds included within a Markush formula shall be admissible as long as there is a reasonably logical and proportional relationship between the scope of the claims and the content of the description. The examples should be representative of all the compounds to be protected.
- New formulations and compositions, as well as processes for their preparation, should generally be deemed obvious in the light of the prior art. Similarly, claims related to pharmacokinetic parameters, micronisation of a known product or particle distribution within a given diameter or weight should not be deemed admissible. Manufacturing processes must produce an
The main purpose of Decree No. 7.962, which had to be accomplished by July 15, is that consumers have entire knowledge about their rights and have access to the basic information regarding online suppliers, such as address, phone and company registration numbers, which must be visible on the sites as well as the pertinent tools for forwarding questions, doubts and complaints.
Each site must show the CNPJ (Cadastro de Pessoas Fisicas – Tax-ID-No. of natural persons) or CPJ (Cadastro Nacional de Pessoas Jurídicas – Tax-ID-No. of juridical persons) of the responsible person as well as the real address, where same can be reached. This information must be displayed in a visible place of the site.
Considering that Brazil requires local presence for the registration of domain names, domains are often registered in the name of local colleagues, who are sometimes requested to reply claims for transactions carried out in those sites. As a first defensive strategy, the colleagues clarify that their firms provide only the domain name services and have no involvement in the administration of the site per se.
In order to avoid potential inconsistencies between the information shown in those sites and the legal defense …Read More
Following Apple’s problems in Mexico and Brazil related to the registration of the mark “iPhone,” in April an Argentine Tribunal of second instance upheld a judicial decision holding that the opposition filed by the owner of the Argentine registration for the word mark “WORK” claiming certain products of Class 9 against Apple´s application for “iWORK” in the same class was not undue or meritless given that both terms were confusingly similar.
As a background to this case, it is worth pointing out that the Argentine PTO (INPI) database shows that an Argentine individual filed an application for the mark “WORK” in Class 9 in 1993. That application, renewed in 2012, claimed only “teaching apparatus and instruments, automatic sales apparatus that function through the introduction of coins or tokens, cash register, machines for calculating and controlling (sic) and computers of general data.” Moreover, INPI’s database shows that on August 6, 2004, Apple filed an application for the word mark “iWORK” in Class 9, which was opposed by the mentioned individual based on his mark “WORK.”
According to the April 23 decision issued by the Chamber III of the Federal Appellate Tribunal on Civil and Commercial Matters, the enormous level of fame …Read More