IPTango: Chile

Showing posts with label Chile. Show all posts

Monday, 5 July 2021

The Latin American Network of IP and Gender has been created

IPTango July 05, 2021 No comments:

On 28 June 2021, it was announced the creation of the Latin American Network of Intellectual Property and Gender. For such purpose, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed between INAPI (Chile), INDECOPI (Peru), RN (Costa Rica), SIC (Colombia) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO, as an honorary member).

The Network was conceived as a forum “to develop activities and promote the intellectual property at the regional level, with a gender perspective”.

The Latin American Network of Intellectual Property and Gender will facilitate the exchange of good practices, stats, and experiences between the Offices to close the gender gap and empower women in the region concerning innovation and entrepreneurship.

During the virtual signing ceremony of the MoU, the founding members expressed the desire that the entire region joins the Network to make a more significant impact.

The Network’s creation was discussed during the “III Sub-regional Meeting on Intellectual Property, Innovation and Gender Equality” in 2019. Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Peru, and Uruguay participated in such a meeting.

Throughout 2020, the IP Offices of Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, and Peru held meetings with WIPO to follow up on the creation of the Network.

Sources: INAPI (Chile), INDECOPI (Peru) and RN (Costa Rica) websites.

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay.

The Chilean Senate approved the bill to join the Madrid Protocol

IPTango June 14, 2021 No comments:

On 19 May 2021, the Chilean Senate approved the bill to join the Madrid Protocol.

As reported here, first, the bill was discussed and approved by the Chamber of Deputies on 14 January 2021. Then, it was sent to the Senate for its approval.

The Madrid Protocol is administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The Treaty establishes an international system that facilities the registration and management of trademarks in the countries of its Contracting Parties.

The Madrid Protocol will enter into force in Chile after the respective promulgation and that the instrument of accession is deposited with WIPO.

Review here more information about the Madrid Protocol.

Sources: INAPI and Chilean Senate websites.

Chile and the Madrid Protocol: are we close yet?

Patricia Covarrubia January 12, 2021 No comments:

In December 2020, the draft Agreement to approve the Madrid Protocol was entered into the first Chilean Constitutional procedure. The discussion of the draft began on December 15, 2020 at the Foreign Relations Committee of the Chamber of Deputies.

The bill (Bulletin 13,929) relates to the international registration of marks. During the discussion, the subsecretary of International Economic Relations; the subsecretary of Economy; and INAPI’s director, explained the benefits and scope of the draft. The Ministry of the Economy and the National Institute of Industrial Property (INAPI), are seeking to promote national trade marks in the international market.

The Madrid Protocol is administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization WIPO). Among its benefits, INAPI notes: single application at the International Office (through the national office), lower management costs due to a single cost structure, presentation in a single language (Spanish, French or English), payment of a set of fees; adds value to products; contributes to global trade; protection in a globalized world. In this regard, INAPI’s director states that ‘80% of Chilean brands that are registered abroad do so in 6 of the 10 countries that are already part of the system.’

Thursday's session (14/01/2021) will open with the Protocol concerning the Madrid Agreement on the international registration of marks based on the report (here) prepared by the Commission of External Relations; a vote is expected.

Membership of the Madrid Union stands at 123 countries (for the list, click here) that represent 80%+ of the word trade. An applicant from an Office of Origin (in this case, Chile) will select Contracting Parties (members of the Madrid Union) where it wishes to protect its mark and vice-versa.

Impacto económico de las marcas en América Latina

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb) November 06, 2019 No comments:

ASIPI e INTA acaban de publicar el informe “Las marcas en América Latina: Estudio de su impacto económico en 10 países de la región”. Este informe es una extensión del informe previamente publicado en el 2016.

En ese primer informe, se evaluó la contribución económica de las industrias intensivas en marcas en Chile, Colombia, Perú, Panamá, y México. En este nuevo informe, se actualizan los resultados de los citados países y se extendió el análisis a cinco nuevos países: Argentina, Brasil, Costa Rica, Guatemala y República Dominicana.

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).

Chile on promoting national products

Patricia Covarrubia September 12, 2019 No comments:

In Sept 2019, the Chilean Intellectual Property Office (INAPI) and Pro Bono Foundation signed a cooperation agreement seeking to promote the ‘education and culture of industrial property protection.’ The aim is to disseminate and guide users about ‘how to protect their brands and innovations’.

Background: Pro Bono is a NGO and a non-profit organization launched back in 2000. The organization ‘promotes and facilitates democratization in access to justice for the benefit of vulnerable people and groups and social organizations.’ It is made of 39 legal firms, 10 companies and an array of lawyers.

One of the key areas will be the use of ‘sello de origen’ - seal of origin, which aims to preserve and stimulate particular forms of traditional manufacturing/production, traditional crafts, and unique ‘national’ products. The purpose of ‘sello de origen’ is to promote the ‘adequate use of industrial property tools for the recognition and protection of Chilean products through the registration of Geographical Indications (GI), Denominations of Origin (DO), Collective (CoM) and Certification Marks (CeM)’. Check our previous post on this here.

There are six regions in continental Chile and as on the 12th of Sept 2019, the following products are benefiting (or to benefit) from these tools:

Norte Grande
Oregano de la Precordillera de Putre (oregano) – registered as GI
Aceitunas de Azapa (olives) – registered as GI
Maíz Lluteño (corn) – registered as GI
Limon de Pica (lime) – registered as GI

Norte Chico
Aceite de Oliva del Valle del Huasco (olive oil) – registered as DO

Centro
Manos de Isla negra (textiles handicraft) – registered as CeM
Dulces de Ligua (sweet pastries) – registered as GI
Sabor Limachino (tomatoe) – registered as CeM
Chicha de Curacaví (alcolic drink) – registered as DO
Dulces de Curacaví (sweet pastries) – registered as GI
Viñedos Casablanca Route (wine products) - registered as CoM
Sandía de Paine (watermelon) – registered as GI
Corazón de Paine (watermelon_ - registered as CoM
Chamantos y mantas corraleras de Doñihue (textiles) – registered as DO
Sal de Cahuil - Boyeruca Lo Valdivia (salt) - registered as DO
Alfarería de Pomaire (traditional clay jars) – registered as DO
Crin de Rari (miniature knitting) – registered as DO
Loza de Pilén (clay pots) – registered as DO
Puerro Azul de Maquehue (leek)– pending as GI
Mieles Altos de Cantillana Producida en Alhué 100% Natural (honey) – pending as a CoM

Sur
Alfarería de Quinchamalí (sweet pastries) – registered as DO
Tomate Angolino (tomatoes) – registered as GI
Prosciutto de Capitán Pastene (ham) – registered as DO
Piedra Cruz (semiprecious stone) – registered as DO
Sidra de Punucapa (cyder) – registered as DO
Cerveza Valdiviana Región de Los Rios (beer) – registered as CoM
SIPAM Chiloé (agricultural patrimony products) – registered as CeM
Cordero Chilote (lamb) – registered as GI
Chupallas de Ninhue (traditional handmade hats) – registered as DO

Austral
Calidad Aysén Patagonia-Chile (products and services) – registered as CeM

Insular
Atún de Isla de Pascua (tuna) – registered as GI
Langosta de Juan Fernández (lobster) – registered as GI
Cangrejo Dorado de Juan Fernández (crab) – registered as GI
Joya Negra del Pacífico (handicraft) – registered as CeM

The battle of Pisco

Patricia Covarrubia January 28, 2019 No comments:

Peru has scored once more in the international recognition of Pisco, their national drink.
The Registry of Industrial Property of Guatemala recognized Pisco as a Denomination of Origin (DO) produced in Peru. By Guatemala recognising Pisco as a drink from Peru, it prevents the registration of the name and any marketing of Pisco within the Guatemalan market if it has not complied with the Peruvian national regulation.

Back in 2017, 'Pisco' was declared Cultural Heritage of the Peruvian Nation (Law 30639). In the same year, the DO Pisco was also granted (by The Peruvian Institute for the Defense of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property INDECOPI) the character of ‘reputable mark’ due to its well-known status.

It is relevant to mention that Pisco is original to Peru as it is original to Chile – therefore there is a long battle between these two countries over the name ‘Pisco’. Pisco has obtained DOs in both jurisdiction as an original and native drink. Some countries would recognise Pisco as coming from Chile and others, from Peru, but not from both countries at the same time, except the EU. This is so because the EU registered Peruvian Pisco as a DO but acknowledged a previous trade agreement (2002) between Chile and the EU in which Pisco was recognized as a DO from Chile. The note clarifies that the protection granted to "Pisco" as a DO to Peru does not hinder the use of that name for products originating in Chile.

Malasia recognizes Pisco as a DO from Peru as well as, Israel, Nicaragua, Algeria, Cuba, Georgia, Haiti, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panama, Dominica Republic, Venezuela, Nicaragua and India (since November 2018). However, Costa Rica, United States, China, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam recognize Pisco as a DO from Chile.

More information about Pisco here.

Legalizing Graffiti: Chilean Chamber of Deputies says YES!

Patricia Covarrubia October 09, 2018 No comments:

From Chile, we received the news that the Chamber of Deputies approved a project that regulates urban graphic art.

Establishing a legal framework ‘that allows the creation of urban graphic art, as expressions of the urban visual arts, both in national public goods and in private goods, always with the prior consent of its owner’ is the aim of the project.

According to the Bulletin, the graphic creations that the law covers are ‘all those artistic works that consist of images or texts expressed freely in walls, undergrounds, bridges, tunnels, or other public goods’. In this case, the artists would need a permit granted by the municipality, competent authority or owner.’ The said permit would be free of charge and granted within 30 days from the date of the request.

Yet, Bulletin 11810 notes that the law will be considered if it follows these principles:

‘a) Advancement, respect, promotion and harmonious relationship between the right to freedom of expression and the right to live in a pollution-free environment, enshrined in the Constitution and International Treaties ratified by Chile and in force.
b) Promotion of an active and binding participation of civil society in decision-making regarding the spaces to be intervened for the development of urban graphic art.
c) Active collaboration among the various agencies responsible for encouraging the development of urban graphic art.
d) Consideration of urban graphic art as a tool for social inclusion, neighbourhood, and community identity.’

An exception to the urban art, which will not be tolerated, is the one that provokes hatred due to race, ethnicity or social group, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or belief, nationality, political or sports affiliation; the illness or disability suffered by a person or group of people, or promotes the use of weapons or violence.

Municipalities must ensure compliance with the provisions of this law. The Culture Committee will now consider the project.

Apart from graffiti been permitted in these circumstances, what else can we learn from this project?
There has been plenty of debate and thoughts from different parties on what is the state of affairs of graffiti towards the copyright system. Is graffiti art? Art written in trains and walls bring matters to discussion in copyright law, for example: originality comes to mind, authorship, joint authorship, tangibility; reproduction; ownership and intellectual common, to name a few. Besides these, we need to think about moral rights. Indeed, by the project recognizing graffiti as an artistic work, we cannot challenge it, because as any other type of work, it is open to protection under copyright.
The courts in Latina America are willing to protect outside the box [giving me more confidence that graffiti will be actually protected under copyright]. For example in Argentina the CAMARA CIVIL - SALA J (Civil Chamber) granted protection to a make-up sanctioning the defendant to payment for infringement of economic and moral rights (here). In the European courts, specifically in the UK fixation for this type of work either the graffiti or the make-up will be problematic. There is a lack of clarity regarding the requirement of permanence for artistic works. This is noticeable in cases such as Creation Records and Metix v Maughan as well as Merchandising Corporation of America v Harpbond (known as the Adam Ant case).
This debate of ‘fixation’ has also received some debates when the work is a tattoo and no doubt it will received some interesting discussion in the case of graffiti.

Latin America keeps speeding...

Patricia Covarrubia October 04, 2018 No comments:

Continuing with yesterdays report and PPHs in Latin America, here comes another one…INAPI (IPO in Chile) and the USPTO (the United States Patent and Trademark Office) had signed a memorandum of understanding for the implementation of the accelerated patent procedure called Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH). The pilot will come into effect from November 01, 2018.

Speeding the process...

As noticed in yesterday news, the program allows national patent applications, which have a favourable resolution issued by the national IPO, to expedite the processing of their corresponding applications, filed with the USPTO – and vice versa.

In Latin America, several bilateral agreements have been signed between national patent offices to promote this project and thus, enabling applications to request, if they wish, the accelerated process PPH. The process is faster because the national offices will share the ‘search’ and ‘examination’ results. Yet, the final decision, that is, the granting will be left to the corresponding IPO.

Source INAPI.
More info on PPH here.

Agreements among Intellectual Property Offices: do they work?

Patricia Covarrubia October 03, 2018 No comments:

Reading the news from the national IPO in Peru (INDECOPI) countless times this blog has reported on agreements between IPOs. Specifically, I usually report on the accelerated patent procedure - Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) [and posting a photo of ‘speedy Gonzalez’ next to the news]. This process accelerates the granting of a patent in a particular country, if the application for the ‘same patent’ has been made first in another IPO (the other party on the agreement) and has a favourable patentability examination.

Peru has signed PPH with Spain, Japan; ‘the countries that make up the Pacific Alliance (Colombia, Mexico and Chile) and the PROSUR countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay and Costa Rica, eight of the 13 that recognize the PPH).’

Because of the agreements and the simplification of a PPH, the National Institute of Industrial Property of Chile (INAPI) became the first office that grants a patent to a Peruvian inventor.
The invention in question ‘allows preserving for a longer time the life of vegetables, such as fresh and precooked vegetables; as well as whole fruits and pulp.’ In 2017 Zucchetti Espinoza, the inventor, obtained a patent for his invention in Peru.

Good to see matters in practice.

More info on PPH here.
Source INDECOPI.

Chile: Rechazan recurso por lanzamiento de discos compactos de patrimonio Kawésqar

Rodrigo Ramirez Herrera @ramahr February 14, 2018 No comments:

Los kawésqar, kawashkar, alacalufes o alakalufes son un grupo nómada indígena de la zona Austral de Chile, que recorrían en canoa los canales de la Patagonia occidental y por los canales que forman las islas ubicadas al oeste de la Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego y al sur del estrecho de Magallanes. Su lengua es el kawésqar.

En el año 1971 se recopilaron cantos y relatos de este pueblo originario respecto de cuya propiedad intelectual se interpuso un recurso de protección constitucional en la Corte de Apelaciones de Punta Arenas en contra de la productora Etnomedia y Consultora Limitada, el Consejo Nacional de la Cultura y las Artes de Magallanes y académico del Departamento de Antropología de la Universidad de Chile por la difusión de dicho material. El recurso fue rechazado de forma unánime porque la recurrente (Margarita Vargas) no posee un derecho indubitado sobre el material difundido.

Según resuelve la Corte, la recurrente no tiene ese derecho pues la recurrente no lo señala y aun entendiendo que el derecho respectivo sea el de propiedad intelectual del material utilizado, éste se encuentra controvertido, puesto que los recurridos sostienen que se trata de un derecho de propiedad sobre el patrimonio cultural inmaterial que le pertenece a todo el Pueblo Kawésqar, no pudiendo ejercitarse un derecho de autor sobre éste en forma individual, el que, a mayor abundamiento, pertenece a la Universidad de Chile que lo adquirió por donación de los familiares de la antropóloga Dra. Grebe, sin que se acredite, además, que la recurrente tenga un poder para representar a la familia Kawésqar.

La sentencia agrega que, atendida la naturaleza del recurso de protección no es la vía idónea para resolver una situación jurídica relativa a la propiedad del material correspondiente al Pueblo Kawésqar, como igualmente si la recurrente es o no titular de la misma, ni menos aún acerca de su naturaleza, dilucidando si es un derecho de propiedad sobre el patrimonio cultural inmaterial de la comunidad antes mencionada.

En consecuencia, como no puede ejercitarse un derecho de autor sobre el material en forma individual y no existe en el asunto planteado un derecho indubitado, deberá recurrirse a la vía ordinaria que corresponda, en un procedimiento de lato conocimiento, en donde existe una etapa de discusión y prueba, en el que habrá de discutirse los aspectos antes señalados.

Fuente: Poder Judicial Corte de Apelaciones de Punta Arenas rol 737 - 2017

Food for thought

Patricia Covarrubia December 11, 2017 No comments:

Last month we advertised a conference i.e. Heritage Across Borders. This was now extended to 31st of December, 2017.

Under the session Tangible and Intangible and under the title: 'Intellectual Property and the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage: Emerging Themes and Challenges in Transboundary and Diaspora Contexts' I submitted a proposal that may be of interest to you [and I definitely will need your help with this paper]. In this proposal I am linking Intangible Heritage, Intellectual Property and Latin America.

You perhaps have heard that back in 2009, UNESCO supported the project to safeguard the intangible cultural heritage of the ‘Aymara’ communities of Bolivia, Chile and Peru. This was to be a 5 year project and I have not heard much about how did it go i.e. has this improved Aymara’s TK?
The Decision of the Intergovernmental Committee 4.COM 15B here, aimed to identify and prepare a catalogue of the Aymara’s TK [excited to read this catalogue (anyone?)]; it also involved to promote and disseminate Aymara’s oral and musical expressions, and moreover to support TK on the production of textile arts.

Here you have then an idea of what a proposal looks like or at least starts as…just put your minds to work and hopefully I will see you in China.

Original post here.

Parliament standards: submitting plagiarised documents

Patricia Covarrubia November 23, 2017 No comments:

Yesterday the Chilean Chamber of Deputies and the Faculty of Physical Sciences and Mathematics of the University of Chile has signed a collaboration agreement to avoid plagiarism in documents.

This comes as no surprise since between 2014 and 2016, there were at least 40 deputies who paid for reports which were plagiarized by either showing verbatim copies taken from the Internet or without citing sources. The Congress therefore resorted to use an anti-plagiarism tool created by the University of Chile known as DOCODE. The software program has been created by the Web Intelligence Center of the Department of Industrial Civil Engineering of the University of Chile (WIC). The software “allows the detection of plagiarism based on technologies of text mining and natural language processing. The tool analyzes the documents that users upload and compares them with all documents indexed on the web and / or a repository of documents created by them. Then, it gives as a result a report of plagiarism in which the different sources of extraction of the document can be reviewed, being able to visit them for their reading.” According to the publication, the Chilean Chamber of Deputies would be “the only legislative body in Latin America ‘that applies a model of this type’”.

The Speaker of the House, noted that the collaboration agreements “is of enormous importance to raise Parliament's standards in terms of submitting documents such as bills, external consultancies, commission reports, etc.”. The parliamentarian also stressed that the use of this tool will place the Chamber of Deputies as the only legislative body in Latin America "that applies a model of this type, where all the works will be part of a comprehensive review process."

CHILE: INAPI actualiza las directrices de examen de patentes

Rodrigo Ramirez Herrera @ramahr November 11, 2017 No comments:

El Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial de Chile ha informado la publicación de una versión actualizada de sus Directrices de Examen de Patentes. El texto actualizado se puede consultar en www.inapi.cl, en la sección "Biblioteca Digital", "Libros", específicamente en la página 125 y siguientes.

La versión actualizada aborda los siguientes puntos:

1) Clarifica que en el evento que una solicitud pudiera dar origen a más de una solicitud divisional, INAPI debe verificar que la solicitud original no se encuentre con resolución definitiva. Si así fuera, las eventuales solicitudes divisionales que pudieran devenir, sean de primera o segunda generación, no podrán beneficiarse del tratamiento de una solicitud divisional e INAPI dispondrá, entre otras medidas, la corrección de la base de datos, eliminando la mención "divisional".
En consecuencia, la presentación de sucesivas solicitudes divisionales tiene como limitación, que la solicitud original no tenga resolución definitiva emitida por INAPI.

2) Aclara y establece que dado que la solicitud divisional se separa de la solicitud original para efectos de su examen, y conserva la misma prioridad de esta última, se le aplican las mismas normas que a la solicitud original para determinar su vigencia, así como para el pago de tasas.

3) Para efectos de determinar el pago de las tasas de mantención de las solicitudes divisionales se establece la fecha de término de los quinquenios o decenios de la solicitud original. En el caso que la tramitación de la solicitud divisional demore más de un quinquenio o decenio según corresponda, se habrán de pagar ambos periodos juntos, una vez que se concede la solicitud divisional, que por cierto, es el mismo procedimiento que se sigue respecto de cualquier solicitud.

4) Se deja expresa constancia que para el caso que la patente original obtuviera una extensión en el plazo de vigencia en virtud de las normas sobre Protección Suplementaria, arts. 53 Bis 1 y siguientes de la Ley 19.039, dicha extensión no será aplicable a la(s) solicitud(es) divisional(es) de la solicitud original, ya que la alegación de eventuales demoras injustificadas dice relación con las particularidades de la tramitación y, en ese contexto, con el requerimiento que se formulara y concediera, si fuera el caso, por el Tribunal de Propiedad Industrial.

FUENTE: INAPI

Chile: Riesgo de confusión (y asociación) entre marcas de vino y cerveza

Rodrigo Ramirez Herrera @ramahr November 02, 2017 No comments:

En fallo dividido, la Corte Suprema de Chile acogió un recurso de casación en el fondo y rechazó la solicitud de registro de la marca Camino del Diablo para cervezas por las similitudes con registro previo Casillero del Diablo de la Viña Concha y Toro.

La sentencia dictada en la causa rol 101.771-2016, por la Segunda Sala -integrada por los ministros Carlos Künsemüller, Manuel Antonio Valderrama, Juan Manuel Muñoz Pardo y los abogados (i) Jaime Rodríguez y Jorge Lagos– acogió la oposición presentada por la empresa vitivinícola al registro de la marca de cerveza, por la similitud gráfica y fonética con su marca "Casillero del Diablo". En definitiva, resolvió que el tribunal de la instancia incurrió en error de derecho en la aplicación de las normas sustantivas que regulan la irregistrabilidad puesto que no obstante haber concurrido los presupuestos que hacían procedente los motivos de prohibición de registro del artículo 20 letra f) y h) de la Ley de Propiedad Industrial, esto es, la posibilidad de error, engaño o confusión, no los aplicó.

La casación advierte que dado que lo discutido no es fáctico no requiere pronunciarse sobre aspectos probatorios (según la sana crítica), pues la cuestión se reduce a descartar motivos de irregistrabilidad por la posibilidad de confusión, examen que debe efectuarse mediante la ponderación de las características de las señas en conflicto. En otras palabras, declara básicamente que el riesgo de confusión (y de asociación) no es una cuestión de hecho, sino que de Derecho. Así, corresponde a los jueces del fondo calificar la irregistrabilidad mediante un juicio de subsunción racional, sin necesidad de prueba.

En cuanto al fondo, resolvió que "concretando estos conceptos al caso que se revisa, la similitud gráfica y fonética entre los signos es evidente. En efecto, la sustitución de algunos componentes no dota al signo de fisonomía propia, pues al confrontar los conjuntos permanece la analogía. Dicha característica exige un análisis de probabilidad de confusión que demuestre cómo, a pesar de tal semejanza, el fin del símbolo se cumple, cual es identificar a los bienes como provenientes de una fuente particular y asignados a un fin o producto específico. Sin embargo, del estudio de las coberturas que cada seña ampara se consolida la equivalencia dada la identidad de clases y productos que distinguen, a saber, bienes de una misma naturaleza que compiten en un mercado conformado por igual público consumidor y que la oponente comercializa a través de la reconocida marca "Casillero del Diablo", lo que generará toda clase de errores y confusiones en relación al origen empresarial de los productos impidiendo una coexistencia pacífica en el mercado".

El voto de minoría correspondió al ministro Juan Muñoz Pardo, que en síntesis argumentó para rechazar el recurso lo siguiente: del mérito de autos se desprende que los contendientes se limitaron a hacer valer sus pretensiones, uno en orden a obtener un registro específico y el otro a oponerse al mismo asilado en las elucubraciones que invocó; y el tribunal, atento al rol que le corresponde, elucidó si ellos se subsumían o no en las disposiciones sustantivas llamadas a resolver la cuestión, actividad de carácter eminentemente valorativa e interpretativa susceptible de acarrear la invalidación del fallo si se verifica atropello de ley, o sea, cuando se da a las normas decisoria litis un alcance ajeno del asignado por el legislador, sea ampliando o restringiendo su preceptiva o al hacer una falsa adaptación de las mismas, como sucede cuando impone que rijan en una hipótesis no prevista por la ley o deja de aplicarlas en el caso reglamentado. Con apego a las directrices que brindan las normas y principios consagrados en la legislación sobre propiedad industrial y que emanan de los artículos 19 y 20 de su ley especial, la valoración del signo que se realizó por los magistrados no aparece como el fruto de un razonamiento extraño a los márgenes normativos del derecho marcario y, por ende, la conclusión alcanzada constituye una interpretación acertada en lo que incumbe a las causales de irregistrabilidad convocadas, pronunciamiento que no se vislumbra como distante de los parámetros de estudio propios de esta disciplina, como los utilizados en este evento, del análisis de los signos y su confrontación, en vista de lo cual no se divisa el error de derecho pretendido

Chile's project: promoting, protecting and boosting traditional products

Patricia Covarrubia October 05, 2017 No comments:

Through the ‘Sello de Origen’ program the Chilean presented to the legal representative of the Sociedad Agrícola Punucapa SA, producers of Cider. With the certification of a Denomination of Origin (DO) to ‘Sidra de Punucapa’. The successful application was the result of a collective effort to “recognize, distinguish and protect this traditional low alcohol drink, based on apple juice, whose history goes back to the middle of 1800.”

Sidra de Puncapa is totally handmade, and it is said to be derived from the traditions of the place. This, added to the “climate of the area, with humid oceanic characteristics with low thermal oscillation and considerable rainfall, allow to obtain a unique product that has led to its recognition.”

Looking at these characteristics one can see why this fall under DO and not just a geographical indication. The Chilean Industrial Property Law defines a Geographical Indication as aimed to “identify a product as originating in the country or region or locality in the country, when its quality, reputation or another property is fundamentally attributable to its geographical origin.” From here you can notice that the Sidra de Puncapa is not just a locality where the product is produced and manufactured and that it has a reputation but it goes farther than these factors. Following then the definition of DO under the Chilean Industrial Property Law we see that DOs “identify a product as originating in the country or region or locality in the country, when its quality, reputation or another property is fundamentally attributable to its geographical origin, also considering other natural and human factors that affect the product’s properties.” We therefore understand that Sidra de Puncapa has other special characteristics that are essentially due to the geographical environment in which they are produced. It bears a qualitative and stronger connection between the product and the place of origin which is determined by a set of natural factors (climate), and by a set of human factors (know-how such as in this case the traditional knowledge).

The Chilean Ministry of Economy together with the Chilean Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial (INAPI) launched the program ‘Sello de Origen’. The project aims to promote traditional products through the grant of Geographical Indication (GI), denomination of Origin (DO), Collective Trade Marks and/or Certification Marks.

Source INAPI. More information about GIs in Chile here. There is also a Factsheet specifically focused on the Chilean system to protect Geographical Indications produced by the Latin America IPR SMEs Helpdesk here.

A legal battle over a ‘Champagne Biscuit’

Patricia Covarrubia October 04, 2017 No comments:

Carozzi, a Chilean multinational company specialised in the food industry, won a legal dispute against the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne (Inter-Professional Committee for Champagne Wine - CIVC) for the use of the word Champagne to identify one of its products.

The controversy began two years ago when Carozzi requested the registration of the mark ‘Costa Galleta Champaña’ (Coast Champagne Biscuit) before the National Institute of Industrial Property (Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial – INAPI). At that time, the Committee for Champagne Wine opposed the registration of the mark, claiming the non-authorised use of a French appellation of origin recognised by Chile and world famous sparkling wine.

Pouring the news...

The INAPI initially rejected the registration of the mark. However, Carozzi appealed the decision, and the Chilean Industrial Property Tribunal later granted its registration. Dissatisfied with the decision, the Committee for Champagne Wine filed an appeal (in cassation) with the Supreme Court. The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Chile analysed whether the registration of the mark ‘Costa Galleta Champaña’ would affect the intellectual property rights of the French wine sector due to possible confusion among consumers generated by the use of the word ‘Champagne’, as alleged by the CIVC.

In that regard, the Court concluded that the mark and the appellation of origin could coexist peacefully on the market because there is no risk of misunderstanding, deception or confusion on the part of consumers. As expected, the Committee for Champagne Wine filled a revocation before the Constitutional Court, which upheld the decision.

In this way, all legal instances were used and, despite the utilisation of a protected appellation of origin, Carozzi can freely use the word Champagne as the name of one of its most popular products in Chile.

Sources here, here and here.

Post written by Florelia Vallejo Trujillo
Assistant Professor, Universidad del Tolima, Colombia
PhD Candidate University of Nottingham, UK

Chile: Subsidio estatal para el patentamiento vía PCT de invenciones chilenas

Rodrigo Ramirez Herrera @ramahr September 26, 2017 1 comment:

En Chile el Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial- INAPI dio inicio al Programa de Apoyo al Patentamiento de Invenciones Chilenas en el Extranjero vía PCT junto con la Corporación de Fomento de la Producción (CORFO).

Esta nueva línea de financiamiento busca dar apoyo directo a empresas nacionales que requieren proteger invenciones en el exterior. Según las bases técnicas, los beneficiarios son personas naturales mayores de 18 años, que posean la calidad de "Empresarios Individuales", y empresas constituidas en Chile con iniciación de actividades en primera categoría del Impuesto a la Renta, quienes deben contar con un acuerdo con la entidad proveedora de conocimiento. Se excluyen aquellas personas jurídicas cuyo único objeto social sea la capacitación, y a las universidades, institutos profesionales y centros de formación técnica.

El programa pretende fomentar y contribuir a la internacionalización y protección de invenciones desarrolladas por empresas nacionales, mediante el cofinanciamiento del proceso de protección internacional llevado a través del sistema de patentes, y el fortalecimiento del plan de negocios para su internacionalización, con la finalidad de abrir nuevos mercados y aumentar significativamente la competitividad de las empresas.

Sus objetivos específicos son:

Facilitar, promover y aumentar la protección de invenciones patentables en el exterior a través de PCT.

Fortalecer el plan de negocios asociado a la invención con foco en la dimensión de internacionalización y estrategia de protección, que apoye la consolidación comercial de la invención nacional en el extranjero.

Contribuir a la generación de conocimiento y capacidades nacionales relacionadas con los procesos de internacionalización de invenciones y fortalecimiento de planes de negocio.

Complementar las acciones de valorización, empaquetamiento y comercialización de las invenciones en el extranjero, apoyando las etapas asociadas al proceso de internacionalización.

El monto de financiamiento llega hasta los 35 millones de pesos (55 mil dólares aproximadamente), el cual cubre -según el tamaño de la empresa-, hasta el 70% del costo del proyecto. El resto debe ser aportado por el beneficiario con aportes en dinero. La ayuda se centra en las etapas intermedias de la cadena de transferencia de la I+D+i generada hacia mercados globales, considerando además el fortalecimiento del plan de negocio y la elaboración de estrategias de patentamiento internacional.

Las propuestas deberán presentar los siguientes antecedentes mínimos al momento de la postulación:

a. Solicitud PCT ante el Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial de Chile.

b. Informe de búsqueda internacional y opinión escrita favorable emitida por una Administración encargada de la búsqueda internacional (ISA).

c. Plan de negocios preliminar vinculado a la invención a patentar, con foco en la dimensión internacional y estrategia de propiedad industrial.

Más información del programa en este enlace.

Pisco: Cultural Heritage of Peru

Patricia Covarrubia August 17, 2017 No comments:

The Peruvian denomination of origin (DO) 'Pisco' has been declared Cultural Heritage of the Peruvian Nation.

Law 30639 which was published yesterday in the Official Gazette of Peru, aims to elevate to the rank of law the Resolution Jefatural 179-88/INC-J. The Peruvian Congress therefore, has declared Pisco as Cultural Patrimony of the Nation.

Law 30639 only contains two articles: Art 1 which establishes the purpose of the Law, that is to raise the rank of Resolution 179-88 / INC-J; and Art 2 which covers the compliance with the declaration granting power to the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Production to monitor and comply with this law.

What is the Law of cultural heritage for?
The Peruvian Law for the Cultural Heritage of the Nation (Law No. 28296) in its Preliminary Title, Art 5 establishes that “…assets belonging to the Cultural Heritage of the Nation, regardless of their private or public status, are protected by the State”. Also Chapter II, Art 24 institutes that the protection of intangible property includes its “identification, documentation, registration, research, preservation, promotion, valorisation, transmission and revitalisation.”

Last month we reported that Peruvian Pisco was granted (by INDECOPI) the character of reputable mark due to its well-known status (here).

In regards to the status of cultural heritage, the newspaper notes a remark made by INDECOPI (which is the national IPO office) that “Peru is here (in Spanish)).
moving forward with its strategy of obtaining the original name of Pisco, taking into account that it currently shares it with Chile”. But is this relevant? How will anything change by obtaining the official status of ‘cultural heritage’? Pisco is original to Peru as it is original to Chile. Both of them has obtained DO in their respective jurisdiction. There are some states that recognise Pisco as coming from Chile and Peru. Other states will recognised as only coming from Chile and others only from Peru (see this report from La Republica

Moreover, this goes in line with something that we reported recently i.e. that Peruvian Pisco could not compete in the category of ‘Pisco’ but of the ‘aguardientes’ in the international contest "Spirits Selection by Concours Mondial de Bruxelles" (Brussels Competition), taken place next week in La Serena, Chile.

Sources here, here and here.

Uruguay and Chile: new agreement in the region

Patricia Covarrubia August 09, 2017 No comments:

Economic and trade relations between Chile and Uruguay are currently governed by the Economic Complementation Agreement between Chile and the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) which comprises also Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay. In order to deepen and stimulate trade relations, both countries agreed to start negotiations in early 2016 to set up a Free Trade Agreement.

This project has now reached the Chilean Chamber of Deputies for its First Constitutional Process.
This Agreement in general will coexist with the international agreements in which both countries are parties. Therefore in regards to Intellectual Property they reaffirm the commitment of both parties to the Berne Convention, Paris Convention, the TRIPS agreement and to its amendment protocol contained in the Doha Declaration (re. access to generic medicines).

If you are looking at the agreement, see chapter 10 (at page 183) which is the one that covers IP.

Article 10.5 covers ‘principles’ which refers to a balanced treatment between the rights of innovators on their creations and the social component of the use of knowledge for the benefit of citizens – provided they are compatible with the IPRs provisions. In this we observed that Article 10.5bis refers to the commitment to public health acknowledging the Implementation of paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and public health WT/L/540; and furthermore, the commitment to support the agreement presented by WT/L/641: inserting Article 31bis after Article 31 and by inserting the Annex to the TRIPS Agreement after Article 73.

Article 10.11 covers ‘denominations of origin and geographical indications’. In this, it asserts that each party must ensure in its legal system the protection of DOs and GIs and this to be in line with the TRIPS. The agreement further contains an Annex, if you look at Annex 10.11 it only covers Pisco and it contains this disclaimer “The foregoing shall be understood without prejudice to the recognition that Uruguay may grant to a country which is not a party in relation to homonymous geographical indications and denominations of origin.” According to MENSAJE Nº 348-364/ Pisco then has automatically secured access to the Uruguayan market without any geographical identifier.

Annex 10.7 has a list of DOs and GIs from both parties. From Uruguay is is mainly wines while Chile shows others such as ‘Limón de Pica’, ‘Sandía de Paine’, ‘Aceituna de Azapa’, ‘Dulces de la Ligua’, ‘Oregano de Putre’, and ‘Cordero Chilote’ to name a few.