News

Leia esta noticia em português aqui.

The Hague Agreement on the International Registration of Industrial Designs entered force last Thursday (3/8). It is a system that allows the possibility of protection in up to 96 signatory countries with an initial request made in a single language.

The agreement simplifies and reduces bureaucracy in the international protection of industrial designs. The Brazilian furniture, footwear, and clothing industries, among others, will have more legal security to export their products to member countries without being unduly copied.

The registration of industrial design protects the ornamental aspects of industrial products, both in form and in prints and applied patterns. The agreement allows reducing costs and simplifying the procedures necessary for registering products with our own design abroad. The system also encourages the attraction of foreign investment by protecting works by non-residents in the country, a rule that favors registrations made by Brazilians abroad.

Before the agreement’s entry into force, in the case of exports, users had to file the request directly with the Intellectual Property offices of each country where they intended to sell the products, pay fees and present the documents in the respective languages.

With the agreement, when requesting the BPTO, the interested party informs that the registration must be made according to the terms of the Hague Agreement without the need for immediate translation into all the languages of the other countries. Then, it must notify the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in which countries it wants to protect industrial design. In the next step, WIPO will be responsible for sending the documentation to the countries listed by the applicant.

The change in procedures makes starting and administering the registration process more accessible. However, each country must examine the application and charge fees for this service. The standardization of procedures makes the steps more agile and simplified.

“The agreement will provide a ‘single window’ for protecting industrial designs,” says Andrea Macera, secretary of Competitiveness and Regulatory Policies at the Ministry of Development, Industry, Commerce and Services.

Concluded in 1999 in Geneva, Switzerland, the Hague Agreement had Brazil’s accession approved by Congress in October 2022.

Source: MDCI

Clique aqui e leia esta notícia em português.

Good news for entrepreneurs who want to protect and market their products with a distinctive design abroad.

With the entry into force of the Hague Agreement this Tuesday, August 1, 2023, the system that allows the registration of up to 100 industrial designs in up to 96 countries (including Brazil itself) is already operating in Brazil through a single international application. In this way, reducing costs and simplifying procedures for national companies will be possible.

Approved by the Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate in 2022, Brazilian adherence to the Hague System was formalized this year with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), allowing its entry into force in August.

Operated by WIPO, which will receive international applications for industrial design, the Hague System will also contribute to attracting foreign investment in the country, as it will facilitate the protection of industrial designs by non-residents of the national territory.

Upon filing, applications will be forwarded by WIPO for review to the national IP authority in each country. In the case of Brazil, the Brazilian Patent Office (BPTO) will be responsible.

To provide for the registration of industrial designs within the scope of the Hague Agreement, the BPTO published Ordinance INPI/PR No. 25 of July 3, 2023, which can be accessed on the Industrial Design Legislation page on the Institute’s portal.

To subsidize the regulation, the Institute conducted a public consultation between April and May of this year, whose responses are also available on the portal.

What is an industrial design registration?

The registration of industrial design protects the ornamental aspects of an object that can be reproduced industrially – both its three-dimensional form and two-dimensional aspects, such as applied prints and patterns.

Interested parties can request this registration if they have created, for example, the new plastic form of a watch, toy, vehicle, packaging, footwear, or even a fabric print’s line and color pattern.

Source: BPTO

Clique aqui para ler esta notícia em português.

Billionaire Elon Musk’s decision to rebrand Twitter as X could be complicated from a legal point of view: companies like Meta and Microsoft already have intellectual property rights over the same letter.

X is so widely used and referenced in trademarks that it is a candidate for legal challenges, and the company, formerly known as Twitter, could face problems defending its X brand in the future.

“There’s a 100% chance that someone over this will sue Twitter,” said trademark attorney Josh Gerben. He counted nearly 900 active U.S. trademark registrations covering the letter X in various sectors.

Musk renamed Twitter “X” on Monday and unveiled a new logo for the social media platform, a stylized black and white version of the letter.

Owners of trademarks – which protect items such as brand names, logos, and slogans that identify product sources – can claim infringement if another mark causes consumer confusion. Remedial measures range from monetary damages to blocking use.

Since 2003, Microsoft has owned an X trademark for communications about its Xbox video game. Meta — whose Threads platform is a new rival to Twitter — has a U.S. trademark registered in 2019 that encompasses a blue and white letter “X” for fields that include software and social media.

Gerben said that Meta and Microsoft likely won’t sue unless they feel threatened by Twitter’s X invading the brand equity they’ve built with the letter.

The three companies did not respond to requests for comment.

Meta itself faced intellectual property challenges when it changed its name from Facebook. It faces trademark lawsuits filed last year by investment firm Metacapital and virtual reality firm MetaX and has settled another lawsuit over its new infinity logo.

And if Musk changes the name, others can still claim the “X” for themselves.

“Given the difficulty of protecting a single letter, especially one as commercially popular as ‘X,’ Twitter’s protection will likely be limited to graphics very similar to its X logo,” said Douglas Masters, trademark attorney at Loeb & Loeb.

“The logo is not distinctive, so that protection will be minimal.”

Source: CNN

Clique aqui para ler esta notícia em português.

Three graphic designers are suing Chinese fast-fashion giant Shein over what they claim is “egregious” copyright infringement and extortion.

In the lawsuit filed in California Federal Court on Tuesday, the designers allege that Shein produced and sold exact copies of their designs.

They claim Shein uses “secret algorithms” to determine fashion trends – algorithms they claim “wouldn’t work” without generating exact copies of the artists’ work.

The designers say the company got rich by “committing individual infractions repeatedly.”

The lawsuit points out that the fast-fashion retailer violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, arguing that these allegations are appropriate because Shein is not just a single entity but rather an “association of de facto entities.”

“No Coco Chanel or Yves Saint Laurent is behind the Shein empire. Instead, there is a mysterious tech genius, Xu Yangtian, also known as Chris Xu,” the lawsuit states.

Citing a BBC Channel 4 documentary, “Inside the Shein Machine,” the lawsuit adds: “When you start to look behind it, who the company is for, it’s a big black hole.”

The complaint alleges that Shein’s corporate structure reveals that the company is a decentralized group of entities so that the company can avoid “liability” and “disclosure of basic information.”

A Shein spokesperson said: “Shein takes all infringement claims seriously, and we take swift action when valid intellectual property rights holders file complaints. We will defend ourselves vigorously against this lawsuit and any claims without merit.”

Krista Perry, one of the designers who showcased the process, created a product titled “Make it Fun,” a print that features a multicolored design around the phrase.

According to the lawsuit, she soon noticed that Shein.com was selling copies of her designs. Following the complaint, she alleges that the email address copyright@shein.com sent her a message offering $500, which she declined.

According to the “About Us” page, Shein says the company only makes 100 to 200 pieces of each model at launch.

These small quantities are intentional; the lawsuit alleges that, before making more parts, Shein can see if anyone complains about a stolen design.

Source: CNN

Clique aqui para ler esta notícia em português.

The National Advertising Self-Regulation Council of Brazil (Conar) opened last Friday (7) an ethical representation against one of the advertisements for the release of the movie “Barbie,” starring Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling.

This means that the trailer for the release of the feature can no longer be shown in any cinema session whose classification is open to children under 12 years of age to verify their compliance with the recommendations of the Brazilian Advertising Self-Regulation Code.

The agency said the representation “is solely and exclusively aimed at the advertisement, since the film is an artistic work, therefore outside the scope of the Code.”

For CNN, Conar’s press office said that Warner, responsible for production and distribution, can “appeal the injunction and is invited to defend itself before Conar’s Ethics Council.”

Official note from Conar

“Then, the rapporteur for the representation granted a partial injunction, taking into account that the trailer is being ostensibly displayed for children and with scenes of non-urbanity, lack of good manners or violent/unsafe act, which violates recommendations of Section 11 of the Code.

In this sense, and because the protection of children’s rights is subject to the precautionary principle, it granted a partial preliminary injunction, recommending that the disclosure of one of the film’s teasers be stopped, a restriction valid only for disclosures in commercial space blocks at cinema sessions films with an indicative rating of less than 12 years, as this is the child protection age established by article 2 of the Child and Adolescent Statute.”

CNN contacted Warner questioning the company’s position, and until the publication of this text, there was no response.

Source: CNN

Clique aqui para ler esta notícia em português.

Chinese tech giant Huawei has once again claimed the top spot in the 5G patents ranking, beating out notable competitors such as Qualcomm and Samsung.

Huawei stands out with 14.59% of global 5G patents

According to a recent report by the Chinese Academy of Information and Communication Technology, Huawei’s 5G patents rank first in the world regarding standards. The report, titled “Global 5G Standard Essential Patent Investigation and Proposed Standard (2023),” reveals that Huawei’s effective global patent families account for 14.59% of the worldwide market.

On the other hand, Qualcomm ranks second with 10.04% of the patents, and Samsung ranks third with 8.80% of the patent share.

Other Big Players in the 5G Patent Ranking

The top 10 players in this ranking include ZTE, LG, Nokia, Ericsson, Datang, OPPO, and Xiaomi. Huawei has remained a leader in 5G technologies, and the company holds most of the 5G network patents in the world.

This leadership reaffirms Huawei’s central role in the telecommunications industry. Despite recent turmoil and geopolitical challenges, the company has managed to maintain its dominant position in the race for 5G technology leadership, outperforming some of its biggest international competitors.

Source: MSN

Clique aqui para ler esta notícia em português.

The Japanese multinational Yakult, famous for its fermented milk, was recognized by the Brazilian Patent Office (BPTO) as a highly renowned trademark. In a decision dated June 13, the agency granted an appeal and understood that the three-dimensional mark representing the bottle of the drink “has a sufficient degree of distinctiveness and exclusivity” to gain registration.

In practice, this means that the packaging symbolizing the trademark will be protected in all branches of activity for ten years. “Since protection is now applied to all classes of products and services, regardless of whether or not Yakult is registered in that specific class, no manufacturer can use it to identify any products or services without authorization”, explains lawyer Luiza Araripe, whose office, Araripe Advogados, represented the company in the case.

The company, which had filed the application in April 2020, needed to prove that Brazilians widely recognized the Yakult bottle; it had a reputation and prestige among consumers and a sufficient degree of distinctiveness and exclusivity in the market. In the decision, the INPI highlighted that, even without the label, the packaging was associated by consumers with the product.

For the Institute, trademarks that are widely known and prestigious in the market are considered highly renowned. Santander, Google, WhatsApp, Gillette, Yahoo, and Waze are trademarks registered in 2023.

Source: JOTA

Clique aqui para ler esta notícia em português.

The 3rd panel of The Superior Court of Justice of Brazil (STJ) began to judge whether there is trademark infringement and unfair competition for parasitic use on behalf of the luxury shopping center “Vogue Square Life Experience” by reproducing the known brand “Vogue”. The trial was interrupted at the request of Minister Nancy Andrighi for asking access to the case docket.

In this case, the owner of the Vogue brand appealed against a decision rejecting a trademark violation and unfair competition action. They pointed out that the interpretation of the industrial property law by the TJ/RJ was mistaken, as it would be undisputed in the legal system that confusion by association also constitutes an illegal act.

The State Court stated in the decision that the name of a shopping center would not be a trademark and that the infringement would only occur in the event that the consumer purchases a product thinking it is the other, that is, in cases of direct confusion.

The rapporteur, Minister Marco Bellizze, emphasized in his vote that there is no restriction of defense in the judgment of the case without the production of evidence requested by the party when duly demonstrated by the origin instances that the process was duly instructed.

He went on to argue that the protection of the trademark, whether highly renowned or not, seeks to avoid confusion or association of a registered trademark with another, being essential that the violation of trademark law causes confusion in the consumer public or erroneous association to the detriment of its holder.

According to the minister, STJ case law defines that “the names attributed to buildings and real estate developments do not enjoy exclusivity, it is common for them to receive the same name, these names, therefore, do not qualify products or services, they only confer a name for the purpose to individualize the good”.

“In the case of the records, the real estate development consists of offices, stores, hotel, gym, and convention center, so that the possibility of misleading consumers, the characterization of parasitic competition or the obfuscation of the brand of the author, mainly because the establishments located there retain their original names, without any connection to products or services of the Vogue brand.”

So he met and disproved the resource. After the vote, Minister Nancy Andrighi asked for a view.

Process: REsp 1,874,635

Source: Migalhas

Leia esta notícia em português aqui.

Agents from the Police Station for the Repression of Crimes Against Immaterial Property (DRCPIM) carried out a large-scale operation, uncovering a scheme involving counterfeiting and illegal marketing of CNG (Natural Gas Vehicular) cylinders and valves. The authorities’ incisive action aimed to ensure consumer safety and protect industrial property.

The person responsible for the establishment where the counterfeited goods were found was taken to the DRCPIM, where he will clarify the origin of the counterfeit products sold. Initially, he will face charges related to crimes against industrial property and consumer relations.

Using these counterfeit products in vehicles represents an imminent danger to everyone’s lives. The poor quality of the material used in these CNG cylinders and valves significantly increases the risk of catastrophic explosions.

Counterfeiting and illegal trade harm consumers and companies that invest in the research and development of quality products. In addition, using these counterfeit materials puts the lives of all users of vehicles equipped with CNG at risk.

The report warns of the seriousness of this crime and the importance of reporting any suspicious activity related to counterfeiting. The safety and integrity of consumers are at stake, and a concerted effort is needed to combat criminal practices.

Keep following our articles on the TPI Blog. Together, we can guarantee the safety and quality of our daily products.

Check out some photos of this case on our Instagram by clicking here.

Source: Civil Police of Rio de Janeiro

Leia esta notícia em português aqui.

Apple may have trouble naming its new Vision Pro mixed reality headset. That’s because Huawei registered the brand long before the Cupertino company.

According to data collected from China’s intellectual protection agency, Huawei requested “Vision Pro” registration in May 2019. That is, about four years ago, something that prevents Apple from starting a dispute over the brand as it happens here in Brazil by the name iPhone.

Huawei’s trademark received registration number 38242888, giving the company the exclusive right to exploit the trademark until December 31, 2031. The Huawei trademark also designates augmented reality devices, virtual reality glasses, radio devices, and more.

As Apple’s glasses have the same characteristics as the name registered by Huawei, everything indicates that the US company will have to use another trademark for its glasses in China.

There are chances that Apple will try to negotiate with Huawei for the right to use the Vision Pro name in China, but that depends on the payment of royalties.

Despite the minor problem in China, Apple can use the name “Vision Pro” in the global market since Huawei’s trademark is valid only in China.

That’s because the company sells products like Smart TVs and even smart glasses that use the name “Vision” on”Chines” soil, something that may have prevented the trademark from being registered in other countries.

Source: Tudocelular