Monday meanderings
The IPKat has just been rejoicing to read the first annual Nicholas Weston (Australian Trade Marks Law Blog) "Tattooed Brands" Global Survey, conducted by phone during May 2009 among 20 tattoo businesses in the suburbs of Melbourne, Australia. Right: kitty cat tattoo from Paradise Tattoo Gathering
The survey asked tattooists whether they had ever tattooed a registered trade marked brand or logo on to someone's body and if so, which ones [trade marks, not bodies] are popular, what age groups get them and whether the recipient was drunk or affected by drugs at the time [this is the second time in as many weeks that IP abuse has been related to drug-taking: see also the Pirate Bay decision, in Ars Technica]. For the record, the top ten brands were as follows:
1. Harley Davidson; 2. Nike; 3. AFL (Australian Rules) club logos; 4. Vegemite; 5. VB; 6. Disney characters (various); 7. Holden; 8. Ford; 9. Fox/Alpinestars (motorcross); 10. Triple J (radio).
The IPKat's friend, IP lawyer and fellow blogger Peter Groves is running again to raise money for the charity Against Breast Cancer. Says Peter, "I am hoping to get support from lots of INTA friends and others". You can sponsor him via his Just Giving page here.
Down in the depths of the distant Antipodes, another of the IPKat's friends, Elena Szentivanyi (of Henry Hughes) brings tidings of the long-awaited legislation to replace New Zealand's Patents Act 1953. The new Bill received its first reading in Parlaiment last week (5 May 2009) and has now been referred to the Commerce Select Committee for public submissions (see here). The full text of the Patents Bill together with the explanatory note can be viewed here. The Patents Act 1953 is based on the long-since repealed UK Patents Act 1949 [the Act the infant IPKat grew to love] and the new Bill will make many changes. A summary of the most significant changes proposed by the Bill appeared on the IPKat weblog last August. Elena kindly adds:
Down in the depths of the distant Antipodes, another of the IPKat's friends, Elena Szentivanyi (of Henry Hughes) brings tidings of the long-awaited legislation to replace New Zealand's Patents Act 1953. The new Bill received its first reading in Parlaiment last week (5 May 2009) and has now been referred to the Commerce Select Committee for public submissions (see here). The full text of the Patents Bill together with the explanatory note can be viewed here. The Patents Act 1953 is based on the long-since repealed UK Patents Act 1949 [the Act the infant IPKat grew to love] and the new Bill will make many changes. A summary of the most significant changes proposed by the Bill appeared on the IPKat weblog last August. Elena kindly adds: "I agree with the comment on the SPC blog that a notable omission from the Bill is any provision relating to supplemetary protection certificates for pharmaceutical or agrochemical substances".The closing date for submissions to the select committee is 2 July 2009. You can make your own submissions by clicking here, or you can contribute to the Henry Hughes submission by emailing the firm here.
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has announced today that the number of international trade mark registrations under the WIPO-administered Madrid system for the international registration of marks topped the one million mark when Austrian “eco” company Grüne Erde, which specializes in natural wood, textile and cosmetic products, registered its mark this month (full press release here). According to WIPO, "Trademark registrations often mirror evolving consumer tastes as companies work to strengthen their market position. In this case, the millionth trademark registration is a “green” brand, reflecting a growing environmental awareness among the general public and the business community".What a curious coincidence, says the IPKat, that the millionth mark is a 'green' mark, given that World Intellectual Property Day this year just happened to have a green theme. The Kat is happy to buy a pint of good old English ale, or an appropriate equivalent, for whichever person within WIPO tells him how the millionth mark was chosen, whether this was indeed the one millionth and, if not, which mark really was?
