Hylly
Henkilönnimi Ong, Burton, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Disentangling "Distintinctiveness" in Determinations of Trade Mark Similarity in Singapore
Julkaistu Sweet & Maxwell, London : 2023.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa European Intellectual Property Review, ISSN 0142-0461 ; 45(12)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. Concepts of "distinctiveness" permeate the foundations of trade marks as a species of intellectual property, threading through the rules and principles governing the subsistence and scope of the legal monopoly enjoyed by trade mark proprietors. A firm grasp of these potentially slippery concepts is required when they are deployed by decision-makers trying to determine whether or not competing marks should be regarded as "similar", a crucial threshold question that every aggrieved proprietor must satisfy before their trade mark claims can succeed. For close to a decade, the Singapore trade mark system has struggled with the ambiquities of the Court of Appeal's landmark decision in Staywell, with various subsequent decisions at the Registry and High Court level reaching diverent positions on whether, and how, the acquired distinctiveness of a trade mark should be factored into the marks-similarity inquiry. This article attempts to explain how the different conceptual strands of distinctiveness are connected with the legal framework for assessing whether competing trade marks are similar or dissimilar, while evaluating a recent attempt by the High Court to clarify this challenging area of trade mark law.
Asiasana
Maantieteellinen nimi asiasanana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke European Intellectual Property Review, 0142-0461 ; 45(12)
*000 ab a ar
*00122932
*008 s2023 xxk e |||| 0|eng |
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aOng, Burton,$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$aDisentangling "Distintinctiveness" in Determinations of Trade Mark Similarity in Singapore /$cBurton Ong.
*264 1$aLondon :$bSweet & Maxwell,$c2023.
*300 $as. 700-713
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aEuropean Intellectual Property Review,$x0142-0461 ;$v45(12)
*520 $aConcepts of "distinctiveness" permeate the foundations of trade marks as a species of intellectual property, threading through the rules and principles governing the subsistence and scope of the legal monopoly enjoyed by trade mark proprietors. A firm grasp of these potentially slippery concepts is required when they are deployed by decision-makers trying to determine whether or not competing marks should be regarded as "similar", a crucial threshold question that every aggrieved proprietor must satisfy before their trade mark claims can succeed. For close to a decade, the Singapore trade mark system has struggled with the ambiquities of the Court of Appeal's landmark decision in Staywell, with various subsequent decisions at the Registry and High Court level reaching diverent positions on whether, and how, the acquired distinctiveness of a trade mark should be factored into the marks-similarity inquiry. This article attempts to explain how the different conceptual strands of distinctiveness are connected with the legal framework for assessing whether competing trade marks are similar or dissimilar, while evaluating a recent attempt by the High Court to clarify this challenging area of trade mark law.
*650 7$aimmateriaalioikeus$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p3068$2yso/fin
*650 7$atavaramerkit$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p1488
*650 7$atavaramerkkilaki$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p21904
*650 7$atunnukset$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p2014
*651 7$aSingapore $0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p105234$2yso/fin
*653 $aerottamiskyky
*653 $adistinctiveness
*653 $asamanlaisuus
*830 0$aEuropean Intellectual Property Review,$x0142-0461 ;$v45(12)
*852 $hSA-EIPR
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.