The following case reiterates the need for a proper password protection policy and periodic security checks to guard against data breaches under Singapore’s Personal Data Protection Act (“the Act). Singapore Red Cross Society (“Red Cross”) ran a website that permitted the community to schedule appointments to donate blood. To this end, Red Cross kept personal […]
Publications
SINGAPORE: Way Off!
An application by S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. (applicant) to invalidate Off-White LLC’s (the proprietor’s) registered trademark on the grounds of similarity, well-known mark status, and passing off was adjudged to fail by the IP adjudicator in his decision, rendered on December 15, 2021. His decision bears highlighting as it underscores how, when considering […]
Thailand’s New Trademark Examination Guideline 2022
The Department of Intellectual Property in Thailand has issued the final version of the Trademark Examination Guideline (“TM Guideline”) on 17th January 2022 which applies to all pending and new trademark applications. The new TM Guideline sheds light on many important issues, pertinently those relating to registrability, highlighted as follows: On the first requirement of […]
Singapore Patent Office Accepts International Applications filed in Chinese
The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (“IPOS”), in its capacity as a receiving Office, International Search Authority (“ISA”), and International Preliminary Examination Authority (“IPEA”) under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, accepts international applications filed in the Chinese language. The Patents Rules in Singapore were amended on 1 January 2017 to allow Chinese as a language for […]
SINGAPORE: Use It or Lose It
A recent decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore issued on September 22, 2021, shed light on the use of a registered trademark, as well as the ways in which a trademark owner can depend on its consent to a separate third party’s use of its trademark to prove genuine use. Unilever PLC (the […]
SINGAPORE: An Entirely Different Beast
A recent opposition by Monster Energy Company (the opponent) against a trademark application filed by Health and Happiness (H&H) Hong Kong Limited (the applicant) is one of the very rare instances whereby the opponent relied on its earlier trademarks for goods to oppose an application for services. The applicant applied to register NOISY BEAST in […]
SAP Asia Ordered to Pay Financial Penalty Having Failed to Protect Personal Data of Its Former Employees
A decision of the Personal Data Protection Commission (“PDPC”) demonstrates the importance of conveying specific business requirements clearly to external vendors and conducting preliminary testing of any supplied products before use, lest an organisation be held in breach of its data protection obligations under the Personal Data Protection Act (“the Act”). The PDPC found that […]
Quotation and Service Comparison Portal Ordered to Pay Financial Penalty and Issued Direction to Comply
A recent decision of the Personal Data Protection Commission (“PDPC”) demonstrates the importance of implementing internal data protection measures to comply with the Personal Data Protection Act (“the Act”). The PDPC investigated after local media reported that iCompare.sg (“the Portal”) had data that had been put up on the Dark Web. The Portal was created […]
Singapore-registered design subsidiary amendments
Published by the Intellectual Property of Singapore (IPOS) on September 10, 2021, amendments have been made on the Registered Designs Rules (“RD Rules”) and the Registered Designs (International Registration) Rules (“RD(IR) Rules”), which took effect from October 1, 2021. A summary of several key amendments is highlighted below Electronic online system IPOS has always advocated […]
SINGAPORE: Distinctive Elements Play Key Role in Distinguishing Marks
The recent case involving “Dr. Wolff’s Vagisan” illustrates the importance of distinguishing a mark from similar, existing marks by adding distinctive elements in the mark applied for. The parties, Dr. August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel (the applicant) and Combe International Ltd (the opponent) had been engaged in a prior invalidation proceeding. The opponent […]