IPTango

Monday, 14 February 2011

ARGENTINA: Resolución P-399 de la Oficina de Patentes.

Natalia Franco Onofre February 14, 2011 No comments:

El Instituto Nacional de la Propiedad Industrial de Argentina (INPI) expidió la Resolución No. P-339 de 29 de diciembre de 2010, referida al intercambio del orden cronológico del estudio de patentes.

Esta Resolución, que es una continuación de la Resolución INPI No. P-264 de 16 de diciembre de 2003, tiene como finalidad complementar los esfuerzos realizados por el INPI para mejorar el plazo de estudio de las solicitudes de patentes de invención. Con la expedición de ésta Resolución se hace un llamado a los titulares de patentes de invención para que antes del 30 de abril de 2011, requieran el intercambio del orden cronológico de estudio de examen de fondo de sus solicitudes de patentes de invención.

Normalmente, el orden cronológico para el comienzo del examen de fondo inicia una vez el mismo haya sido requerido y se haya pagado la correspondiente tasa. Con la Resolución No. P-339, el titular de una patente de invención puede intercambiar las fechas en las cuales se presentó el requerimiento de examen de fondo, entre solicitudes de patentes de su propiedad, siempre y cuando las mismas pertenezcan a la misma subclase de la Clasificación Internacional de Patentes (CIP) y ya hayan sido publicadas.

Teniendo en cuenta lo anterior, los interesados deberán presentar, antes del 30 de abril de 2011, sus peticiones ante el INPI, mediante el formulario previsto como Anexo de la precitada Resolución INPI No. P-264 del 16 de diciembre de 2003.

Pharma patents in Mexico: an assessment of the current position

Jeremy February 13, 2011 No comments:

A review of the current state of Mexico's patent law, following the decree of 18 June 2010, assesses this major change in the Industrial Property Law 1994. It covers (i) amendments to the definition of 'industrial applicability'; (ii) the partial priority rules; (iii) a new system for oppositions to patent applications during prosecution; (iv) monitoring of counterfeiting and performance of inspections by the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property and (v) new infringement claims in order to protect trade dress more effectively and prevent abuses of patent rights, particularly in the light of the interests of the pharmaceutical industry, which the changes are said to benefit.

The authors of this review conclude that it will not be until the first cases pass through the courts that the precise effect of the various changes will be seen. The changes were designed to keep both sides of the pharmaceutical industry satisfied, strengthening the hand of both patent holders and their opponents and eliminating delays. They warn, however, that if the amendments

"... merely created a system that is unfair to both sides, they may have drawn the battle lines for disputes that will be detrimental to the Mexican patent system and Mexican business at an international level".

Source: "Reform for pharmaceutical patents: fair balance or fresh disputes?", prepared for International Law Office by Héctor Elias Chagoya and Juan Carlos Amaro of Becerril, Coca & Becerril SC, Mexico (an earlier version of this piece was published in IP Value 2011 - An international guide for the boardroom, by IAM magazine).

To extend or not to extend--the question that the Brazilian STJ has answered several times.

Patricia Covarrubia February 11, 2011 No comments:

The Brazilian Instituto Nacional da Propriedad Intelectual (INPI) informs that the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice (STJ) denied on February 8, 2011, extending the period of two patents relating to drugs Sifrol (used to fight Parkinson's disease) and Persantin (against thrombosis).

This decision follows the understanding of the STJ regarding the pipeline system. The STJ has in several occasions rejected the extension of patents such as: Viagra, Lipitor, Gleevec, and Plavix.

The pipeline system refers to a mechanism established by Brazilian Intellectual Property Law 1996. It refers to the protection of inventions of pharmaceutical and chemical patents that could not be registered before under the old legislation. This considers the possibility of protecting under the patent system chemical substances, compositions and products, through a ‘pipeline’ mechanism, which should be counted from the ‘first filing’ abroad. Through the mechanism, the patent would have a year to be made to the INPI and worth the time remaining in the country where it was ‘first file’ and its validity cannot exceed 20 years.

United States to refresh two Latin America FTAs

Patricia Covarrubia February 10, 2011 No comments:

President Obama has instructed Ron Kirk (United States Trade Representative) to step up with Colombia and Panama as to resolve any outstanding issue. The goal is to approve both FTA: the US with Colombia and the US with Panama.

To this effect next week Mr Kirk is sending to Colombia a delegation to begin the process. However, he warns that "any schedule will depend on resolving" issues like labour right protection and human rights.

I presume that if the FTA between the US and Colombia is finally ratified by the US Congress, many can raise again hopes that the adoption of the Madrid Protocol is a certain fact.

Few months back this blog raised the issue that in this FTA there was a footnote where Colombia committed itself to accede to the Madrid Protocol. Also we need to remember that the FTA between the EU and Colombia do cover this issue as well.

That said, does it mean that Colombia will discuss the Bill 234/2009, concerning the adoption of the Madrid Protocol? Will it be any time soon?

OMPI . Solicitudes de Patentes en 2010

Gilberto Macias (@gmaciasb) February 10, 2011 1 comment:

Según informa la Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Industrial (OMPI), el número de solicitudes internacionales de patente solicitudes internacionales de patente presentadas con arreglo al Tratado de Cooperación en materia de Patentes (PCT) aumentó un 4,8% en 2010.

El país que registro un mayor crecimiento durante el año pasado fue China (+56.2%), seguido de la República de Corea (+20,5%) y el Japón (+7,9%), lo cual compensó unos resultados desparejos en los países europeos y un descenso en los Estados Unidos de América (1,7%).

Según sus estadísticas durante el 2010 se presentaron 162.9001 solicitudes internacionales de patente, siendo los EE.UU. el país que más solicitudes presentó.

Ningún país de Latinoamérica figura entre los primeros 15 países, siendo Brasil el mejor colocado con 442 solicitudes, seguido de México con 144 solicitudes.

Más información aquí.

Jorge Ávila Kept as President of the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office

José Carlos Vaz e Dias February 09, 2011 No comments:

The national newspaper “O GLOBO” reported today that Mr. Jorge Ávila has been maintained by the Ministry of Development, Industry and Commerce as the President of the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO).

This information is understood as recognition of the work so far led by Mr. Jorge Ávila in the last 4 years ahead of the BPTO and represents that the new President of Brazil – Mrs. Dilma Rousseff – will keep the policy of improving the services rendered by the local agency of patents and trademarks.

Another important task undertaken by Mr. Jorge Ávila has been the hiring of personnel with technical background to assist the existing patent and trademark examiners and the reduction of the backlog of work. In this matter, trademark prosecution is taking nowadays approximately 24 months to be concluded and patent prosecution approximately 5 years, instead of the 7 years previously seen at the agency.

Mr. Jorge Ávila has promoted consistently partnerships and cooperation with main patent and trademark offices, such as the USPTO, the UK Intellectual Property Office and patent offices of Latin America.

His maintenance in the office should be made officially public in the next couple of days.

Ecuador: IP rights are Constitutional Rights

Aurelio Lopez-Tarruella Martinez February 09, 2011 No comments:

Flavio Arosemena (Arosemena Burbano & asociados) and Alfonso Rivera (Tobar y Bustamante) have sent IP Tango information concerning a recent decision by the Tenth Provisional Judge of Criminal Guarantees of Guayaquil (Sorry, this translation sounds awful!). The decision concerns a dispute we have already talked about in IP Tango about the complaint of a wholesalers association against IEPI. The association understood that actions of IEPI to seize counterfeited products were a violation of constitutional right to work of professionals of the wholesale business.
The decision states that copyright and intellectual property rights are considered rights recognised in the Ecuatorian Constitution. Furthermore, the judge states that illegal or semi-illegal activities cannot be justified on the existence of a constitutional right to work.
The inmediate consequence of this decision is that the actions adopted by IEPI to protect intellectual property rights are considered as legal.

Juicio marcario entre LAN (Chile) y LAM, en Europa

Rodrigo Ramirez Herrera @ramahr February 08, 2011 1 comment:

El 8 de febrero el Tribunal General de la Unión Europea (TGUE) ha confirmado el registro de marca de Air Nostrum (Líneas Aéreas del Mediterráneo “LAM”) que había sido objeto de oposición por parte de la compañía aérea de Chile LAN Airlines S.A. Los jueces de Luxemburgo con su sentencia (full text) confirmaron el criterio de la Oficina de armonización del mercado interior (marcas dibujos y modelos), que en sus dos instancias desestimó las pretensiones de LAN Airlines de impedir el registro de la marca española “LAM”, de Iberia, por ser similar a la primera. Los jueces fallaron que “no existe riesgo de confusión entre las marcas”, entre “LAN” y “LAM”, aunque ambos se dirigen a un público hispanohablante.

El Tribunal resolvió que “son distintas marcas por sus diferencias gráficas y fonéticas y por su diferencia conceptual por lo que respecta al sector del público”. Además “mientras que para el sector del público que ni siquiera tiene conocimiento mínimo de español no existe ninguna diferencia o similitud conceptual entre las marcas en conflicto, el sector con conocimientos mínimos de español percibirá una diferencia entre Air Nostrum Líneas Aéreas del Mediterráneo y Lan Airlines”. Sentenció que la aerolínea LAN se distingue por estas únicas tres letras y aparece siempre en mayúsculas y seguido de una estrella estilizada.

Lan Airlines, S.A., formuló oposición, con arreglo al artículo 42 del Reglamento nº 40/94 (actualmente, artículo 41 del Reglamento nº 207/2009), contra el registro de la marca solicitada para los servicios comprendidos en la clase 39 del Arreglo de Niza : "Transporte; embalaje y almacenaje de mercancías; organización de viajes". La oposición se basó en los siguientes derechos anteriores: Marca denominativa anterior LAN, objeto del registro comunitario nº 3350899 de 2004; y marca figurativa anterior, del registro comunitario nº 3694957, de 2005.

LAN puede todavía recurrir de casación, ante el Tribunal de la UE.

A, B, C – Y: On Biodiversity Access and Benefit-Sharing

Patricia Covarrubia February 08, 2011 No comments:

It has been reported by the IP watch, that four developing countries have already signed a recent international agreement -- The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits. The agreement was adopted on October 2010, and seeks to facilitate access to genetic resources.

Algeria, Brazil, Colombia, and Yemen appear to be keen to sign the protocol (open for signature until 1 February 2012) and having a quick look at it, it appears too mellow. The protocol is full of words such as ‘recognizing, acknowledging, and reaffirming’. However, the text has been considered by some as not quite there (can we say ‘immature’?). The critiques focus on the fact that the text is open to interpretation and ‘much left to national level implementation.’ This view can be observed in some of the Articles which state for example: ‘in accordance with domestic law’; ‘subject to domestic law’; ‘ as appropriate’; to name a few.

However, the protocol needs to be ratified by at least 50 parties and would enter into force 90 days after the fiftieth ratification. I guess we can start counting now – there are less than 360 days to see if the protocol will be (or not) ratified.

What is the fuss about?
The protocol is very much ‘what it says on the tin’ -- fair and equitable share. That said, it is for every party to interpret according to their domestic legislation and procedures. In general, the text is bringing into attention the following: when you have the ingredients to make a cake and do not know how to make one, along comes someone uses the ingredients and leave with the whole cake! This is pretty much what the Protocol is establishing, you cannot leave with the whole cake, and you need to recognise and acknowledge the party that gave you the ingredients.

Descriptive use of another's mark is okay, rules Argentine court

Jeremy February 06, 2011 No comments:

Last August, in Expobicentenario SA v Arte Gráfico Editorial Argentino SA (Case 3201/10), the Argentine Court of Appeals denied injunctive relief to prohibit use of the phrase 'Argentina 200 años' ("Argentina 200 years") by the defendant. Expobicentenario had earlier secured trade mark registration of the word mark ARGENTINA 200 AÑOS, for goods and services in Classes 16, 35 and 41 of the Nice Classification. Media giant Arte Gráfico Editorial Argentino subsequently published a supplement of its Clarín newspaper to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Argentine independence using the expression 'Clarín Bicentenario 1810-2010', as well as 'Argentina 200 años'.

Refusing the injunction the Court of Appeals held that, according to the law, “use of a third party’s mark in a non-typical manner is not necessarily illegal”. Here, the phrase 'Argentina 200 años' was not used as a trade mark, but in a descriptive way. The presumption that freedom of expression should be limited when a phrase contains a trade mark must be rejected when the mark is not used in a distinctive way. Such use does not fall within the scope of protection of the trade mark.

Source: "Injunction denied as trademark used in descriptive manner", by Jorge Otamendi (G Breuer, Buenos Aires), World Trademark Review, 31 January 2011

Some IPTango moves

* Listed as one of the "Best blogs on Intellectual and Industrial Property Law". The University of Alicante Intellectual Property & Information Technology Project (UAIPIT).

* One of the only two Latin American blog listed in the "Top 100 Intellectual Property Blogs". Feedspot, as of May 2021.

* Listed as one of the "Top 15 Blogs For An Intellectual Property (IP) Enthusiasts". Buzzfeed.com, January 2017.

* Listed as one of the "World's Best IP Blogs". BananaIP.com, December 2015.

* IPTango founder Professor Jeremy Phillips was listed as one of the Managing Intellectual Property magazine's "Fifty Most Influential People" of 2005, 2011, 2013, and 2014.

* Listed as one of the "Influential intellectual property blawgs". A Dictionary of Intellectual Property Law, Peter Groves, 2011.

* Listed as one of the "Communities of Blawgers". Los blogs jurídicos y la web 2.0. para la difusión y la enseñanza del derecho, Gonzalo Ramírez Cleves, 2010.