Thailand’s New Customs Recordation Procedures for Trademark and Copyright – Inspection Request on a case-by-case basis

In this last instalment on Thailand’s new customs recordation procedures, please note that addition to the general customs recordation, an Inspection Request may also be filed on a case-by-case basis should the trademark and copyright owners (“IP owners”) suspect any importing, exporting, or transiting goods to be infringing their IP rights. Upon verification of the […]

SINGAPORE: Examiner Rejects “PARTY LIKE GATSBY” Mark for Lack of Distinctiveness

Slogans are useful tools in brand advertisements. However, as they often consist of ordinary words and phrases which are laudatory in nature, slogans generally do not meet the distinctiveness requirement for purposes of trademark registration in the absence of evidence of use. The following recent case reminds us of this. Arangur UG (haftungsbeschrankt) (applicant) applied […]

Thailand’s New Customs Recordation Procedures for Trademark and Copyright – Requirements

Further to our recent post on the reversal of administration of customs recordal to the Royal Thai Customs Department (“Customs”), trademark and copyright owners (“IP owners”) who wish to file customs recordation should take note of the following requirements: Recordation of Registered Trademarks Appointment of a local agent, if the IP owner is a foreigner; […]

IPOS Extended the SG IP Fast Track Programme for Another 2 Years and Ended the 12 Months File-To-Grant Programme from 30 April 2022

The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) has recently extended their existing examination acceleration programme for patents, SG IP Fast Track Programme, for another 2 years from 30 April 2022 until 30 April 2024, to give enterprises a competitive advantage as Singapore and the world reopen from the Covid-19 pandemic. Concurrently, however, IPOS has terminated […]

Twitter, Inc. v. V V Technology Pte Ltd [2022] SGIPOS 4

A recent decision shows the importance of consumer perception of economic linkages to the likelihood of confusion inquiry. VV Technology Pte Ltd (the applicant) had already registered its mark for goods and services under other classes that overlapped with the opponent’s mark. The applicant then sought to register its mark under Class 42 for several services […]

Daimler AG v. Vivo Mobile Communication Co., Ltd.

The case concerns an opposition in Singapore by Daimler AG (the opponent) to a trademark application by Viva Mobile Communication Co. (the applicant) to register (the application mark). The opponent had opposed the application on two grounds: namely, Sections 8(2) (b) and 8(7)(a) of the Trade Marks Act (Cap 332, 2020 Rev Ed) (the act). […]