Welcome to our blog for Intellectual Property Law and Practice in Latin America!
¡Bienvenidos a nuestro blog de Derecho y Práctica de la Propiedad Intelectual en Latinoamérica!
Bem-vindo ao nosso blog sobre Direito e Prática de Propriedade Intelectual na América Latina!
Showing posts with label Madrid Protocol. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Madrid Protocol. Show all posts

Monday, 14 June 2021

IPTango

The Chilean Senate approved the bill to join the Madrid Protocol


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.
Read More

Tuesday, 12 January 2021

Patricia Covarrubia

Chile and the Madrid Protocol: are we close yet?

    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.
Read More

Tuesday, 13 October 2020

Patricia Covarrubia

Brazil: First Anniversary of the Madrid Protocol

    No comments:

 The Madrid Protocol has been running for over 30 years (June, 1989). With it, the flexibility to the Madrid System has seen an increased number in international trade mark registrations. After three decades, the system expanded to cover Latin America and the Caribbean (Antigua and Barbuda, Brazil, Cuba, and Mexico).


In 2019, WIPO reports that there has been over 60,000 international applications marking a 10th year of uninterrupted growth. While the main driver of the overall rise comes from the US (37%), followed by Germany and France; tailed by Switzerland, the UK, Japan, Italy, Australia, and Turkey.


Brazil, celebrating its 1st anniversary (a member since 2nd Oct 2019) has received 109 international applications from national users. This has also facilitated the use of the Madrid system by trade marks holders located in other countries and thus, Brazil hit the 7,896 number from international users indicating Brazil as their designated country (INPI
here
). 


To read the full data, click here.

Read More

Tuesday, 9 April 2019

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb)

Brasil más cerca de Madrid


La Cámara de Diputados de Brasil aprobó el pasado 3 de abril el Proyecto de Decreto Legislativo nº 860/2017 sobre el tratado internacional "Protocolo referente al Acuerdo de Madrid relativo al Registro Internacional de Marcas", más conocido como Protocolo de Madrid. El texto ahora pasa al Senado Federal.

El Sistema de Madrid permite proteger una marca en gran número de países mediante la obtención de un registro internacional que surte efecto en cada una de las Partes Contratantes que se hayan designado. Consta actualmente de 104 Miembros y abarca 120 países, que representan más del 80% del comercio mundial.

La preparación operativa realizada por el INPI para la implementación del Protocolo de Madrid abarca la modificación de los sistemas de TI utilizados en el procesamiento de pedidos de marca, la creación y modificación de procedimientos operativos, la edición de actos normativos y manuales, una reestructuración interna y el dimensionamiento y capacitación de los equipos.

Brasil sería el 7º país del continente americano que se adheriría al Sistema de Madrid.
Read More

Friday, 1 June 2018

Patricia Covarrubia

Brazil and the Madrid Protocol: are they nearly there?

    No comments:
In June 2017, the Brazilian Presidency sent to the National Congress Mensagem nº 201, to allow Brazil to adhere to the Madrid Protocol.

Therefore, building upon this, on May 10, 2018 the Brazilian National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)’s officials met at the headquarters of the INPI in Rio de Janeiro. At this stage, the WIPO exposed its experience in the management of this international trade mark registration system. INPI’s president noted the ‘efforts of the INPI team to reduce the time of examination of trade mark applications, in order to make possible the adhesion to the Agreement.’ The WIPO counterparts highlighted that Brazil is ‘well-structured to meet the requirements to participate in the Protocol, which will open up opportunities for domestic companies interested in the world market.’ On the same date, there was also a technical meeting with the INPI Trademark Board team, focusing on practical issues regarding the functioning of the system.

Additionally, on May 20, 2018, the General Coordinator of the Directorate of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (DIRMA), represented INPI at the "Meeting of Users of the Madrid System", organized by the WIPO in Seattle, United States. The INPI reported that the coordinator-general was as well to participate in the ‘IP Office Workshop’, which was organized by the Canadian, Hungarian and Mexico IPOs. It is also reported that one of the theme to be examined is ‘the registration of trade marks as part of an innovation strategy’.

Source the Brazilian National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) here and  here.

Read More

Friday, 10 November 2017

Patricia Covarrubia

Brazil: going to Madrid?

    No comments:
Welcome Madrid System!
At the Brazilian Office of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the Instituto Nacional da Propiedade Industrial (INPI) presented a project showing the adequacy of the Institute's structure, which is a “fundamental step for Brazil's possible accession to the Madrid Protocol”. This appears to go in line with the Brazilian Presidency’s message on the topic which was delivered to the National Congress back in June.

At the moment the registration of a trade mark takes 25 months if unopposed but by 2018 such period will be shortened by the required 18 months. It is also said that by 2019, INPI might be starting to receive international orders via the Madrid System.

WIPO’s director and the regional director of the WIPO Office in Brazil and the INPI’s president spoke about the importance of the Madrid System enhancing the significance of the Madrid Protocol for Brazilian companies. INPI’s president also noticed the need for a better IT infrastructure and the necessity to hire new trade marks examiners.

Source INPI.
Read More

Tuesday, 16 August 2016

Patricia Covarrubia

Mexico: time to oppose to trade mark registration

    No comments:
At the end of this month (August 30, 2016) Mexico will implement an opposition system in trade mark.

Image result for roadshowIn May this year the Latin America IPR SMEs Helpdesk and the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) collaborated on a roadshow in the UK. Participating in one of this workshops in Reading we cover ‘Intellectual Property Rights in Latin America – sources of help and support’ and one of the issues covered was the (lack of) trade mark opposition in Mexico.

Mexico is one of the few countries which does not provide for trade mark opposition proceedings. The Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial (IMPI) is the administrative authority legally authorized to conduct ex officio examinations of trade mark applications on absolute and relative grounds. As noted in the World Trademark Review, Mexico is not bound to introduce opposition proceedings as a result of its accession to the Madrid System, but this amendment would make the trade mark system more efficient. Colombia was the first Latin America emerging country to ratify the Protocol on the Madrid Agreement (2012), then Mexico (2013). Cuba signed in 1995.

On 23 August José Miguel Mena López, Legal Services Manager at Clarke, Modet & Cº Mexico will be holding a Webinar on the implementation of the opposition system in Mexico. Details of the Webinar and how to registry can be found here.
Read More

Friday, 20 November 2015

Patricia Covarrubia

Trans-Pacific Partnership - Intellectual Property: How might it affect European SMEs doing business abroad?

    No comments:
What is the TTP?
The Trans-Pacific Partnership has recently been ratified. It is an international treaty that sets a series of terms aimed at improving the commercial relationships among the Signatory Parties.

Who are the members?
The members who ratified the TPP last October were: United States, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Mexico, Peru, Singapore, Brunei, Canada, Vietnam and Malaysia.

What about China?
Other countries such as China or Colombia chose not to enter the agreement at this time, however it does not preclude them from joining it in the near future.

What are the main concerns?
The New Zealand Government was the first to publish a version of the Treaty, which is still under revision and may be subject to changes. Nevertheless the list of priority issues – which are not likely to change – are:
 National Treatment and Market Access for Goods
 Rules of Origin and Origin Procedures
 Textiles and Apparel
 Customs Administration and Trade Facilitation
 Trade Remedies
 Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
 Technical Barriers to Trade
 Investment
 Cross-Border Trade in Services
 Financial Services
 Temporary Entry for Business Persons
 Telecommunications
 Electronic Commerce
 Government Procurement
 Competition Policy
 State-Owned Enterprises and Designated Monopolies
 Intellectual Property
 Labour
 Environment
 Cooperation and Capacity Building
 Competitiveness and Business Facilitation
 Development
 Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises
 Regulatory Coherence
 Transparency and Anti-Corruption
 Administrative and Institutional Provisions
 Dispute Settlement

May a European SME benefit from the Treaty?
Yes. Even though there are some rules that will only benefit companies based in the Member States of the Treaty, there are others directed towards the improvement and harmonization of legal systems and institutions of each Member.
Concerning Intellectual Property Rights, the “National Treatment” and “Most Favoured Nation” principles from the Paris Convention makes it mandatory to apply the same advantages that the State concedes to its own nationals (or nationals from third countries) to the nationals from Signatory Parties (all EU countries belong to the Paris Convention).

We are going to examine how some of these improvements could be very helpful for EU SMEs

Trademarks: What will be the main advantages for EU applicants?
One of the first obligations that the TTP imposes on signatory parties is to ratify two Trademark-Related treaties: The Madrid Protocol and the Singapore Treaty.
The first one establishes the implementation of the Madrid System under WIPO´s administration, which allows for the application of an International Trademark Registration in each member of the Madrid Agreement/ Madrid Protocol. EU citizens and companies will therefore be able to request the protection of their International Registrations in countries such as Peru, Chile, Brunei or Malaysia, which is usually cheaper and simpler than applying for a National Trademark on each of these countries.

On the other hand, the Singapore Treaty aims to harmonise the application, registration and management procedures of Trademark files. Thus, applicants and holders in countries such as Brunei, Chile, Peru, Vietnam and Malaysia will benefit from the advantages of the harmonization of Trademark procedures, which will be closely similar to those in their countries of origin.
Other important changes to highlight are the suppression of the visibility of the sign requirement that is targeted to allow the registration of non-conventional Trademarks (such as smell trademarks and sound trademarks) or the obligation of maintaining an on-line and freely accessible Trademark database.

Other consequences of the TPP is that the three Latin American members of the TPP, Mexico, Chile and Peru, plus Colombia have signed a Joint Declaration aimed at harmonizing their procedures on Trademarks and Patents and to develop good practices to reduce the granting time.

Patents: How EU SMEs can benefit from the TTP provisions?
Under the TTP the Parties are obliged to sign the Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of Patent Procedure. Hence Patents that include microorganisms as part of it will be accepted in each Member of the Treaty.

Another novelty is the setting of a grace period, whose scope will be extended to 12 months prior the Patent Application. Any disclosure done by the applicant or a third party that obtained the information from the applicant will not be taken into account when evaluating the novelty of the patent (WATCH-OUT! European countries do not provide for a “grace period” therefore any disclosure may jeopardise your European applications’ novelty).

One of the most common problems that EU companies face when patenting abroad is that grant procedures tend to be longer than in Europe. The TTP provides for the possibility of requesting a “Patent Term Adjustment” when unreasonable delays have been incurred during the issuance of the Patent. We should wait to see how TTP Members include such obligation within their laws, but it will certainly have a deterrent effect on Patent granting delays.

Image result for wipoCopyright and Related Rights: What is new?
The main milestone on Copyright and Related Rights protection is that Signatory Parties must ratify the WIPO Copyright Treaty WCT and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty WPPT.

WCT slightly expands the scope of Protection stated in the Berne Convention concerning economic rights and also includes specific articles on software and databases’ Copyright protection, whereas WPPT harmonizes the protection of certain related rights, namely those of performers and producers of phonograms. Additionally, TPP expands the duration of economic rights to seventy years after the author’s demise.

Enforcement: How will TPP help EU SMEs to enforce their rights?
The scope of the TPP also comprises measures addressed to ensure the effectiveness of the IP enforcement. For example, there are articles that strengthen the role of Technical Protection Measures (TPMs) in digital contents by establishing that the circumvention of such measures will be considered an infringement regardless of the infringement of the Copyright of the content itself.

Another measure towards an effective enforcement is the possibility that the Signatory Parties set pre-established and/or additional damages in case of infringement. Both cases aim to have a deterrent effect. Additionally, pre-established damages will also be very helpful for the purposes of awarding damages to the right holder.

Finally, a series of dispositions are aimed at obtaining the cooperation of Internet Services Providers in order to stop infringements and identify infringers. Such dispositions have been very controversial.

If you want to read more (in Spanish) on these and other TPP related issues take a look here (part I) and here (part II)

Post written by Vicente Zafrilla Diaz-Marta, IP expert at Latin America IPR SME Helpdesk 
Read More

Tuesday, 1 April 2014

Patricia Covarrubia

Look who's 1?: Mexico and the Madrid Protocol

    No comments:
A year ago, Mexico signed the Madrid Protocol giving trade mark owners a simplified mechanism through which they can protect their mark abroad. Administered by WIPO it is said to be the most efficient means of achieving international protection for a registered trade mark.

Before 2012 no Latin American country (apart from Cuba) had acceded and much was speculated (here, here and here). Colombia and Mexico signed just months apart from each other and time flies….Mexico is already celebrating its first birthday with good reports from WIPO ( Mexico’s process of the applications have been of high quality and efficiency).

The Mexican Institute of Intellectual Property (IMPI) reports that after Mexico’s entry, 54 applications from companies and individuals with business activities in Mexico have submitted their trade mark through the Madrid Protocol. These businesses seek protection mainly in the United States, the European Union and China. In addition, abroad applications notifying Mexico as Designated Office have reached 5,476 of which 1,907 has been granted. Countries that have designated Mexico the most are: the United States, Switzerland, Germany, Spain and China.

IMPI emphasises that the Protocol encourages foreign investment providing legal certainty and giving the opportunity to international companies to enter the domestic market providing an easy accessible mechanism for registration of their marks in our country.

Source IMPI.
Read More

Monday, 24 June 2013

Patricia Covarrubia

Speedy services for trade mark applicants

    No comments:
The Colombian Superintendent of Industry and Commerce (SIC), Pablo Felipe Robledo Del Castillo, together with its delegate for Industrial Property, José Luis Londoño, presented trade mark titles for twenty business located in the area known as ‘Eje Cafetero’. This area comprises the departments of Caldas, Risaralda, Quindío, the northeast of Valle del Cauca and the south of Antioquía and the name ‘Eje Cafetero’ was given due to their great coffee production.

On the day, Mr Londoño noted the importance of registering a mark, mentioning that the owner of the mark will have all the “benefits that the legal system grants". He added that the registration of the trade mark entitles its holder to oppose the registration or use of other similar marks used after, and thus giving value to the company.

The news is advertised as part of the ‘Mobile SIC innovative program’ which allows direct contact and service to consumers. However, what really got my attention from the news was the following: Mr Robledo said that SIC used to have delays: a time-limit issue regarding the processing of a trade mark application, and that nowadays from 24months they have reduced it to 5.6 months.
I do have some queries regarding this issue:
 1. - Does this data i.e. 5.6 month reflect just these cases? Or is this the overall processing time outside the Mobile SIC innovative programme?
 2. – In Covarrubia: 'The Madrid Protocol in Latin America: Is Colombia changing business strategies or acting as a guinea pig?' (EIPR, 2013 (35(1))) the research in this matter reveals that it may take approximately eight months to register a trade mark IF NO OPPOSITION IS FILED – but if so, the period may increase to up to two years. Thus, when Mr Robledo noted that the time has been reduced from 2 years to 5.6 months, I wonder if those two years are counting a possible opposition and the 5.6 months are normal proceeding with no opposition. If so, then the information should read from 8 months to 5.6 months, don’t you think?

Anyway apart from these enquiry I must say that there has been an improvement in the examination procedure making a speedy examination trade mark system(regardless of the answer to 1 & 2). This progress may have something to do with Colombia been a party to the Madrid Protocol. Colombia was in need to accommodate its trade mark system as to reflect an 18-month period. The Protocol has a strict policy regarding time and establishes that if the national trade mark office does not notify a decision to the applicant in that period of time the application is considered granted, following the principle of “no news is good news”.

Source SIC.
Read More

Monday, 18 March 2013

Patricia Covarrubia

A good guinea pig?

    No comments:
In January we announced the publication of “The Madrid Protocol in Latin America: Is Colombia changing business strategies or acting as a guinea pig?” [EIPR]. Today’s news relates to this issue, since I read in the Brazilian Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial notice board that Brazil is really preparing for it.

On Monday 4th March the Inter- ministerial Group of Intellectual Property (GIPI) sent to the Chamber of Foreign Trade (CAMEX) the proposed accession to the Treaty. This indeed is showing the interest of Brazil to join the Madrid Protocol, which will facilitate the registration of national trade marks to other member countries – an international registration that eliminates the multiples process/applications.

According to the news published by INPI, if CAMEX agrees, then it will move to the Casa Civil da Presidência da República (Civil House of the Presidency), and later to the National Congress, which will take the final decision.

At present, there are 88 contracting parties. There were not members from Latin America until recently (apart from Cuba). The Madrid Protocol entered in force in Colombia in August 29, 2012 (the 87th member); since then Mexico (the 88th member) followed - entering into force only just: February 19, 2013…urmmm…will Brazil be the 89th?

Source INPI.
Read More

Tuesday, 26 February 2013

Rodrigo Ramirez Herrera @ramahr

IMPI y OMPI firman MoU relacionado con el Sistema de Madrid

Luego del ingreso de México al Sistema de Madrid, ha comenzado a  desarrollar acciones para su puesta en marcha, como la suscripción de un Memorándum de Entendimiento (MoU) entre el IMPI y la Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual (OMPI), por el cual se comprometen al envío de información entre ambas partes, por medios electrónicos.

El Memorándum establece que el IMPI transmitirá a la OMPI, información referente a formularios oficiales y diversos documentos que deberá presentar de acuerdo a los procedimientos del Sistema de Madrid. 

En tanto el IMPI en conjunto con la OMPI, consultarán los registros internacionales mediante la base de datos electrónica que mantiene la Oficina Internacional en virtud del Reglamento Común del Arreglo de Madrid, lo que permitirá en todo momento analizar el estatus de dichos registros de manera sencilla y ágil. Ambas partes podrán utilizar el Protocolo de Transferencia de Archivos (FTP) de la red pública para la transmisión de documentos electrónicos, lo que ayudará a la agilización en cuánto a la búsqueda de archivos referentes a las solicitudes de marcas tanto en México como en las registradas por la OMPI.

El MoU entró en vigor el 18 de febrero de 2013 con vigencia indefinida y pudiendo ambas partes darlo por terminado mediante previa notificación, dirigida a la otra parte, con una antelación de 90 días a la fecha de término.

Fuente: IMPI
Read More

Monday, 18 February 2013

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb)

México – Entrada en vigor del Sistema de Madrid

 
Mañana 19 de febrero de 2013 es el día señalado para que entre en vigor el Protocolo concerniente al Arreglo de Madrid en México.
 
Como os informamos hace algunos meses, México se adhirió al Protocolo de Madrid, convirtiéndose de ésta forma en el tercer país de Latinoamérica que se adhiere al Sistema de Madrid para el Registro Internacional de Marcas.
 
Esperamos que la puesta en marcha sea sin problemas y que las empresas puedan beneficiarse de las ventajas que concede el Sistema de Madrid.
Read More

Monday, 7 January 2013

Patricia Covarrubia

The Madrid Protocol in Latin America: Is Colombia changing business strategies or acting as a guinea pig?

    No comments:
The most recent issue of the European Intellectual Property Review (EIPR) i.e. January, 2013 Vol 35 No 1, brings us an article which aims to “analyse the consequences of Colombia’s accession to the Madrid Protocol, a system which grants an international trade mark with the filing of one application only: the central question is whether Colombia’s accession will produce a “snowball effect” in Latin America.”

In fact, the question appears to be already answered since Mexico, as previously reported here, is now also part of this protocol.

The article's title is the heading of this post and is written by Andres Echeverri Uribe, Organizacion Corona, Bogota, and I.  While the article embarks on studying the advantages and disadvantages of accession for the Colombia’s market in an era of globalization, it also explores the reality of its own small and medium enterprises (SMEs) when trade mark is at issue.

The article can be accessed through Westlaw or Lawtel.
Read More

Tuesday, 20 November 2012

Rodrigo Ramirez Herrera @ramahr

México se adhiere al Protocolo de Madrid

La Secretaría de Economía informó que México se unió este lunes al denominado Protocolo concerniente al Arreglo de Madrid relativo al Registro Internacional de Marcas de 27 de junio 1989 (Sistema de Madrid).

En Ginebra, ante el Director General de la Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual (OMPI), Francis Gurry, el Secretario de Economía mexicano, Bruno Ferrari, -acompañado del Subsecretario de Comercio Exterior de la SE, Francisco de Rosenzweig y del Director General del Instituto Mexicano de Propiedad Industrial (IMPI), Rodrigo Roque-, depositaron el instrumento de adhesión de México a dicho protocolo.

El Director General de la OMPI, afirmó que "el marco legal e institucional de México garantizará la implementación exitosa del Protocolo de Madrid en México," al tiempo que indicó que el IMPI se encuentra dentro de las primeras quince oficinas que reciben el número más alto de solicitudes de marca en todo el mundo.

México se convierte en el cuarto país que habla hispana en el Sistema de Madrid. El total de miembros del sistema internacional de marcas asciende a la fecha a 89 habiéndose incorporado este año, Filipinas, Colombia, Nueva Zelanda además de México.

Read More

Friday, 8 June 2012

Patricia Covarrubia

Madrid Protocol: Colombia is ready!

    No comments:
Following last week post that the Madrid Protocol will be effective for Colombia on 29 August 2012, we now received the news that the Colombia Constitutional Court declared the constitutionality of the Madrid Protocol (sentence C-251-2012).

The judgment established that the grounds for the decision took into account inter alia: "For having been duly completed, within the stages, debates and constitutional requirements established in the Congress Regulation Acts. Therefore, the Act 1455 of 2011 is declared enforceable, from the formal point of view."

The Colombian Association of Intellectual Property (ACPI) reports that in the judgement the Court analysed the convenience of the accession of the Protocol and how this will open new markets due to facilitating effective protection of trade marks both domestically and in foreign markets, whether their owners are nationals or foreigners. It also explained that the process of national trade mark will remain the same, and that it will not be taken by a new or parallel system, “but with the difference that the international registration gives priority rights in all States signatories to the Protocol.”

Thanks goes to Andres Echeverri (Corporate Legal Team at Organizacion Corona, Colombia) for addressing the news. Also he notes that the last part of a process to approve an international treaty is for the Colombian Constitutional Court to check its constitutionality. Everything in order, Colombia is finally ready.
Read More

Wednesday, 30 May 2012

Jeremy

Colombia and Madrid: WIPO names the day

Readers of this weblog must by now be almost fed up with the long-running saga of Colombia's dalliance with the Madrid Protocol. First it was a question of "will she, won't she?" Then it became not a question of "whether" but of "when". All of this has been covered at regular intervals by your dedicated correspondents. But now we know the final answer. A WIPO media release, "Colombia Joins the International Trademark System", tells us that the Madrid Protocol will be effective for Colombia -- the 87th member of the international trade mark system -- on 29 August 2012.
Read More

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb)

México: El Senado aprueba la adhesión al Protocolo de Madrid


Nuestros amigos de ALHEN nos han informado que el día de ayer 25 de abril de 2012, el Senado de México aprobó la adhesión de México al Protocolo de Madrid para el Registro Internacional de Marcas, sistema administrado por la Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual (OMPI).

El Protocolo de Madrid facilita el registro de las marcas en el extranjero, ya que permite iniciar el procedimiento, de forma simultánea, en 84 países por medio de la presentación de una sola solicitud ante una Oficina Internacional, en el caso de nuestro país, ante el IMPI, y en uno de los 3 idiomas oficiales (inglés, francés o español). 

De acuerdo con el comunicado del Senado, la adhesión al Protocolo de Madrid "...es parte de la modernización que nuestro país está llevando a cabo al marco normativo del sistema marcario, buscando brindar certeza jurídica a las empresas y contribuir a la competitividad de nuestro país".

La decisión del Senado está creando demasiada polémica en México, pues si bien es cierto que la adhesión al protocolo permitiría a las empresas mexicanas ahorrar costes y tiempo en la protección de sus marcas en otros países, por otro lado, se pone en riesgo a empresas mexicanas frente a empresas extranjeras que soliciten una marca idéntica o similar a otra de una mepresa mexicana.

De acuerdo a lo manifestado por el representante de la AMPPI, el problema se basa principalmente en el hecho de que en México no existe un procedimiento de oposición que permitiría a las empresas mexicanas defender sus marcas frente a las que soliciten empresas extranjeras.

Aquí puede consultarse el comunicado de prensa del Senado.
Read More
Jeremy

Breaking news: Mexico, Colombia opt for Madrid

The Mexican Senate has just approved the accession of Mexico to the Madrid Protocol on the international registration of trade marks, and Colombia is to deposit its instrument of accession to the Protocol this coming June.

This information is not yet available on the WIPO Madrid System pages.
Read More

Wednesday, 11 April 2012

Rodrigo Ramirez Herrera @ramahr

Corte Constitucional de Colombia declara exequible Protocolo de Madrid

La Corte Constitucional de Colombia en Sentencia C-251/2012 declaró exequible [del lat. exsequibĭlis, que se puede ejecutar] la Ley 1455 del 29 de junio de 2011, “Por medio de la cual se aprueba el Protocolo concerniente al Arreglo de Madrid relativo al Registro Internacional de Marcas‟, adoptado en Madrid el 27 de junio de 1989, modificado el 3 de octubre de 2006 y el 12 de noviembre de 2007” así como el propio Protocolo de Madrid (en adelante "el Protocolo"), en atención a los siguientes fundamentos. 

(1) Por haberse cumplido en debida forma, con las etapas, debates y requisitos constitucionales y establecidos en la ley orgánica del Reglamento del Congreso. Por consiguiente, la Ley 1455 de 2011 es declarada exequible, desde el punto de vista formal. 

(2) De igual manera, la Corte encontró que el contenido del “Protocolo" en nada contraviene el texto constitucional. Indicó que la adhesión de Colombia ofrece varias ventajas a los productores de bienes y servicios, por cuanto la ausencia de un sistema de registro internacional implicaba lo siguiente: (i) que cada registro de una marca en el extranjero requiriera presentar sendas solicitudes en las respectivas Oficinas Nacionales, lo cual conlleva pagos de tasas y traducciones; (ii) una vez registrada su marca en el extranjero, las empresas transportadoras debían velar por mantener en vigor dichos registros en sus mercados de exportación, de allí que toda renovación y cambio en la titularidad, el nombre o la dirección deben realizarse en cada país en el que el titular haya registrado la marca y (iii) las empresas que se veían más afectadas por los considerables costos que entrañaba el registro y el mantenimiento de sus marcas en otros países son las pequeñas y medianas empresas. 

(3) La adhesión al Protocolo es un factor que favorece las exportaciones, en la medida en que simplifica la protección de las marcas colombianas en el extranjero. 

(4) Es un medio para que las empresas de otras Partes Contratantes del Protocolo obtengan con mayor facilidad la protección de sus marcas en el país en cuestión, dado que lo único que tienen que hacer es designar al país de que se trate en su solicitud internacional. Es evidente que esto contribuirá a un clima todavía más propicio para las inversiones del extranjero. Así mismo, se generan ciertos ingresos para el fisco nacional, en la medida que por cada designación realizada en una solicitud o en un registro internacional, el país recibe participación del total correspondiente a los complementos de tasas recaudados por la OMPI, más una participación en el total correspondiente a las tasas suplementarias percibidas por cada clase de productos o servicios a partir de la tercera clase. 

Por lo tanto, el Protocolo de Madrid se ajusta a la internacionalización de las relaciones económicas consagrada en el artículo 226 de la Constitución, en la medida en que establece un procedimiento internacional encaminado a obtener una más efectiva protección internacional de las marcas y productos nacionales en los mercados extranjeros. De hecho, el Protocolo, al estipular unas normas que estandarizan y armonizan la solicitud de registro marcario en las legislaciones de los Estados Partes, favorece la apertura de mercados y la entrada de Colombia al comercio internacional. Al mismo tiempo, el Protocolo no exime a las personas naturales o jurídicas de obtener o solicitar el registro de marca en el país de origen, por lo que no se presenta una usurpación de la soberanía nacional. Por consiguiente, el procedimiento para registrar las marcas nacionales sigue siendo el mismo, con la distinción de que la inscripción de la solicitud internacional en el registro ante la OMPI confiere derechos de prioridad en todos los Estados Partes en el Protocolo. Desde esta misma perspectiva, el Protocolo asegura la reciprocidad, como quiera que una solicitud de registro termina por convertirse en varias de ellas en distintos Estados, como si aquella hubiese sido objeto de una solicitud directa ante la oficina nacional de marcas del respectivo país.

Ponente: Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto

Fuente: Sentencia C-251/2012 Corte Constitucional de Colombia/ Comunicado Nº 14
Read More