Brazil: Madrid Protocol in practice

Brazil: Madrid Protocol in practice

Patricia Covarrubia   October 25, 2019   No comments:

This week, the Brazilian Intellectual Property Office (INPI) published the first process for international applications of trade marks.

It is observed, that the exam integrates the new activities performed by INPI, including electronic filing and the transmission of the international application at the WIPO International Secretariat.
This publication remarks on the variations observed during the Madrid Protocol certification exam. Thus, the Industrial Property Magazine (RPI) in its ‘trade mark’ section includes now a chapter called: Protocol of Madrid.

INPI also reports that its national office has received a request for an international trade mark application. This has already been sent to WIPO through a very efficient and speedy process since it was done within twenty days, which is less than one-third of the deadline set for this step (two months is the set time).

The spet by step guidance published by INPI can be found here (in Portuguese)

More info here (in Portuguese)

Read More

Chile vs Peru: the battle over ‘Pisco’ continues

Chile vs Peru: the battle over ‘Pisco’ continues

Patricia Covarrubia   October 02, 2019   No comments:

The Peruvian Ministry of External Relations has issued a Press Release stating that Peru will appeal to the ruling of the Court of First Instance of Thailand against the registration of a Chilean association that intends to use the term Pisco.

Press Release 010 - 19
Given the news reports that advance the ruling of the Court of First Instance on Intellectual Property and International Trade of Thailand, it should be stressed that despite the exclusive ownership of the Peruvian Denomination of Origin Pisco in Thailand, said Court ruled that in that country you can use "Pisco Chile".
Peru considers that this first decision of the Thailand Court does lead to consumer confusion in that country, since the Pisco Denomination of Origin is Peruvian and this is confirmed by the historical, geographical, cultural and scientific arguments that our country supports and defends in all the world’s court.
In that sense, the ruling in the first instance will be appealed immediately by Peru, in order to continue opposing any attempt to register because these are obvious errors of fact and law.

A Pisco sour for a sour battle

Years of international dispute have persisted over the origin of Pisco which both Chile and Peru have produced since colonial times. Both countries recognize it in their own jurisdiction as a Denomination of Origin. Additionally, back in 2018, Chile was open to accepting the name of Peruvian Pisco if Peru accepted the name of Chilean Pisco – a qui pro quo that did not go far since Peru did not accept such a proposal.

The case brought appears straightforward. If the Thailandese Registry of Industrial Property recognized Pisco as a Denomination of Origin (DO) produced in Peru, it does then prevents the registration of the name and any marketing of Pisco within the Thailand market if it has not complied with the Peruvian national regulation. Clearly, if Pisco was not made in Peru it cannot be called as such. Well, it is not that simple. In India, the dispute over the name went over 9 years (finally won by Peru) and this appears to be the case now in Thailand. The dispute is over a year on, so get ready for a long battle.

The whisky exchange webpage (where I get my inspiration from:) ) notes that ‘Pisco is a grape brandy produced in Chile and Peru’. In the EU (oh BREXIT is coming…who will register first in the UK, Chile or Peru) both, Chile and Peru, were granted geographical indication. Chile had an association agreement (2002) where recognition was given, and then Peru applied for the registration of Pisco as GI (granted in 2013).

Read More