The 21st century business is built on intellectual property (IP), just as the 19th century firm had property as its main asset, a leading global IP lawyer says.
Taking the Apple iPhone as an example, David Llewelyn, the deputy chairman and external director of the IP Academy, Singapore, pointed out that the cost of making the phone in China amounts to only 5% of the price consumers pay for it.
“The 95% that Apple keeps is for its technology, design, trademarks and the Apple logo. That’s what everybody wants to reproduce,” he said.
“It’s almost negligent to not look at the IP issue in a long-term way,”said Llewelyn, whose book on the subject, Invisible Gold in Asia: Creating Wealth Through Intellectual Property, was launched earlier this year.
“It’s a matter of educating people that this is the business of the future. This is the long-term sustainable advantage that businesses have,” said Llewelyn, who was here recently to promote the third Global Forum on Intellectual Property, to be held in Singapore from Jan 6-7.
Nevertheless, getting people to claim their intellectual property rights is relatively easy, he said. “Transforming it from liability to asset is the hard part. That comes from advertising, promoting, licensing and doing joint ventures,” said Llewelyn. “There’s definitely a change of mindset from short-term to longer-term investment going on all around Asia, in building up their invisible gold reserves.”
Llewelyn says transforming intellectual property rights from liability to asset is the hard part.
Llewelyn says transforming intellectual property rights from liability to asset is the hard part.
Chinese president Hu Jintao signalled this trend in 2003 when he said that world competition was going to revolve around IP rights. Five years later, China introduced a national IP strategy.
“The government told Chinese businesses they must start creating their own IP, such as patents, designs and trademarks, rather than copying foreigners or having to pay for foreigners’ patented technology,” Llewelyn said.
The same is happening in India, and all around the region.
“Just reducing prices all the time and copying some brand leader is a short-term strategy. And the manufacturing might move from Malaysia to China, Vietnam or Indonesia, as has been happening in the last 10 years,” he said.
Having a unique identity is important for IP rights protection because IP is difficult to protect otherwise, he said. Citing the example of Legend, which was a Chinese computer brand, Llewelyn pointed out that it was a difficult name to protect. “So they changed it to Lenovo, and when they bought over IBM’s ThinkPad, they used the new brand name, and it is now a global brand,” he said.
According to Llewelyn, entrepreneurs need to think ahead to the time when they would be successful, and protect their IP long before they become well known.
“You’ve got to think ahead to where you’re going to be selling your products and do your homework about what the IP position in those countries is as well,” he said.
“If Malaysian companies are going to do business in China, they often find that their trademarks are registered there by someone else, and then they get sued and have to pay money for it,” said Llewelyn.
“This is a game that is being played now by businesses all around the world,” he said. “You need to have an IP strategy which fits with your business strategy and that fits your budget.”
According to Llewelyn, the costs of protecting IP range from nothing to millions. For example, the Chinese electronics firm ZTE Corp, has an annual IP budget of US$16 million (RM49.4 million) and it has 30,000 patents.
“In many of the areas in which they do business, unless you have a lot of patents, you might as well not be in the game, because you will be threatened with patent infringement action when you go into the US or European markets,” he said. “So, you then say, well, I’ve got my patents here, let’s do a deal.”
IP can be licensed to others for huge profits, said Llewelyn. “In 1982, Austrian entrepreneur Dietrich Mateschitz on a visit to Thailand saw an energy drink that was being drunk out of a bottle by long distance lorry drivers. He did a deal with the producer Chaleo Yoovidhya, where each took 49% share in the company and Yoovidhya’s son had 2%. Yoovidhya is now the wealthiest man in Thailand through realising Mateschitz’s marketing genius,” he said.
The global forum, which is a biennial event, will be held at the Raffles City Convention Centre. It is expected to attract about 500 lawyers, professionals, entrepreneurs and business development managers in IP-related fields. It will feature some 80 international speakers on various aspects of the IP business, such as best practices in Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, the US and Europe. “By listening to how others use and abuse their IP rights, businesses can learn how to play the game,” said Llewelyn. - The Edge
Patents, trademarks and copyright are integral parts of intellectual property that form intangible assets in our daily life. IP matters from Malaysia and the world are shared here.
Friday, December 31, 2010
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Innovation Competition
MyIPO is organizing an innovation competition. There are three categories of competition and a winner will be picked from each category of students, researchers and inventors. Winners will receive:
- financing for patent application, if qualified
- WIPO medal
- financing to attend training or study visit to Korea
For details visit link
- financing for patent application, if qualified
- WIPO medal
- financing to attend training or study visit to Korea
For details visit link
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Trademark Registrations Trend
The trademark office of China was the largest recipient of trademark applications in 2008 with 669,088 applications, followed by the IP offices of the US (294,070), the Republic of Korea (137,461), India (130,172) and Brazil (119,841). In other words, three of the four so-called BRIC countries (Brazil, Russian Federation, India and China) are among the top five offices, with the Russian Federation being in fifteenth place. The combined share of the BRIC countries was around 30% of all trademark applications worldwide. The top 10 offices in 2008 accounted for just over half (55%) of all trademark applications, whereas the remaining 10 offices comprised just 16% of trademark applications worldwide. In total, the top 20 offices received over two-thirds (71%) of all applications.
From 2007 to 2008, the number of registrations issued by the IP office of China jumped by approximately 141,000 to 389,115 representing an increase of nearly 57% and more than doubling the number of registrations issued in the US.
While, on average, IP offices issued 33% of total trademark registrations to non-residents in 2008, some offices, such as those of Australia, Canada, Malaysia, the Russian Federation and Switzerland, issued between 40% and 68% of registrations to non-residents, meaning that these offices’ percent shares of non-resident registrations are higher than their shares of resident applications.
Together, the offices of China, the US, India, Japan and the OHIM issued almost one-third of total estimated trademark registrations worldwide in 2008. These offices, along with the remaining top 10 offices, issued about half of total registrations. The top 20 trademark registration by IP offices of 2008:
1. China 389,115 (majority from China)
2. USA 184,306 (majority from USA)
3. India 102,257 (majority from non-resident)
4. Japan 97,525 (majority from Japan)
5. OHIM 82,998 (resident more than non-resident)
6. Italy 80,307 (majority from Italy)
7. Mexico 63,063 (resident more than non-resident)
8. Republic of Korea 62,443 (majority from Korea)
9. Spain 60,992 (majority from Spain)
10. Brazil 60,086 (resident more than non-resident)
11. Germany 56,103 (majority from Germany)
12. Turkey 48,001 (majority from Turkey)
13. Australia 46,206 (resident more than non-resident)
14. Russian Federation 40,520 (almost equal)
15. United Kingdom 39,500 (majority from UK)
16. Chile 34,161 (resident more than non-resident)
17. Switzerland 28,695 (resident less than non-resident)
18. Malaysia 27,847 (resident less than non-resident)
19. Canada 27,743 (resident less than non-resident)
20. Ukraine 25,516 (resident less than non-resident)
From 2007 to 2008, the number of registrations issued by the IP office of China jumped by approximately 141,000 to 389,115 representing an increase of nearly 57% and more than doubling the number of registrations issued in the US.
While, on average, IP offices issued 33% of total trademark registrations to non-residents in 2008, some offices, such as those of Australia, Canada, Malaysia, the Russian Federation and Switzerland, issued between 40% and 68% of registrations to non-residents, meaning that these offices’ percent shares of non-resident registrations are higher than their shares of resident applications.
Together, the offices of China, the US, India, Japan and the OHIM issued almost one-third of total estimated trademark registrations worldwide in 2008. These offices, along with the remaining top 10 offices, issued about half of total registrations. The top 20 trademark registration by IP offices of 2008:
1. China 389,115 (majority from China)
2. USA 184,306 (majority from USA)
3. India 102,257 (majority from non-resident)
4. Japan 97,525 (majority from Japan)
5. OHIM 82,998 (resident more than non-resident)
6. Italy 80,307 (majority from Italy)
7. Mexico 63,063 (resident more than non-resident)
8. Republic of Korea 62,443 (majority from Korea)
9. Spain 60,992 (majority from Spain)
10. Brazil 60,086 (resident more than non-resident)
11. Germany 56,103 (majority from Germany)
12. Turkey 48,001 (majority from Turkey)
13. Australia 46,206 (resident more than non-resident)
14. Russian Federation 40,520 (almost equal)
15. United Kingdom 39,500 (majority from UK)
16. Chile 34,161 (resident more than non-resident)
17. Switzerland 28,695 (resident less than non-resident)
18. Malaysia 27,847 (resident less than non-resident)
19. Canada 27,743 (resident less than non-resident)
20. Ukraine 25,516 (resident less than non-resident)
PCT National Phase
The national or regional patent office at which the applicant enters the PCT national phase initiates the granting procedure according to prevailing national law. Statistics associated with PCT national phase entry offer information on international patenting strategies.
Most applicants enter the PCT national phase around 18 months from the international filing date. On average, applicants using the PCT system, enter the national phase in slightly less than three patent offices for every PCT application filed. The average fillings of USA is also less than three. In 2008, applicants from Switzerland had, on average, 4.2 PCT national phase entries for every PCT application. In contrast, the average number of PCT national phase entries by applicants from China and the Republic of Korea was relatively low (below 2), revealing a smaller country coverage in the international patenting strategies of applicants from those countries.
The EPO was the most preferred destination for national phase, reflecting the large number of EPC Member States. It had more than 80,000 PCT national phase entries in 2008, followed by USA, China and Japan. The top 20 national phase entries for 2008:
1. European Patent Office 83,576 (regional patent, 27,692 from USA)
2. USA 61,122 (15,988 from Japan)
3. China 57,641
4. Japan 54,546
5. Canada 31,975
6. Republic of Korea 31,909
7. Australia 20,523
8. Brazil 15,639
9. Mexico 14,160
10. Russian Federation 11,499 (except Eurasion patent)
11. Singapore 7,322
12. Israel 6,288
13. Norway 4,902 (except European patent)
14. Germany 3,662 (except European patent, 1,079 from Japan)
15. Malaysia 3,529
16. New Zealand 3,258
17. Philipines 2,828
18. Ukraine 2,548
19. Eurasion Patent Organization 2,545 (regional patent)
20. United Kingdom 1,921 (except European patent)
USA is the top applicant for most of the national phase entry. Japan is the top applicant for USA and Germany national phase entry.
Most applicants enter the PCT national phase around 18 months from the international filing date. On average, applicants using the PCT system, enter the national phase in slightly less than three patent offices for every PCT application filed. The average fillings of USA is also less than three. In 2008, applicants from Switzerland had, on average, 4.2 PCT national phase entries for every PCT application. In contrast, the average number of PCT national phase entries by applicants from China and the Republic of Korea was relatively low (below 2), revealing a smaller country coverage in the international patenting strategies of applicants from those countries.
The EPO was the most preferred destination for national phase, reflecting the large number of EPC Member States. It had more than 80,000 PCT national phase entries in 2008, followed by USA, China and Japan. The top 20 national phase entries for 2008:
1. European Patent Office 83,576 (regional patent, 27,692 from USA)
2. USA 61,122 (15,988 from Japan)
3. China 57,641
4. Japan 54,546
5. Canada 31,975
6. Republic of Korea 31,909
7. Australia 20,523
8. Brazil 15,639
9. Mexico 14,160
10. Russian Federation 11,499 (except Eurasion patent)
11. Singapore 7,322
12. Israel 6,288
13. Norway 4,902 (except European patent)
14. Germany 3,662 (except European patent, 1,079 from Japan)
15. Malaysia 3,529
16. New Zealand 3,258
17. Philipines 2,828
18. Ukraine 2,548
19. Eurasion Patent Organization 2,545 (regional patent)
20. United Kingdom 1,921 (except European patent)
USA is the top applicant for most of the national phase entry. Japan is the top applicant for USA and Germany national phase entry.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Relocation of MyIPO
It is official, MyIPO is moving out from Dayabumi to Menara UOA Bangsar. From 22 November 2010 onwards, their customer service counter will operate in their new office:
Perbadanan Harta Intelek Malaysia,
1-7, Menara UOA Bangsar,
5 Jalan Bangsar Utama 1,
59000 Kuala Lumpur
There are two towers in Menara UOA Bangsar and MyIPO is located in Tower B, first floor.
Perbadanan Harta Intelek Malaysia,
1-7, Menara UOA Bangsar,
5 Jalan Bangsar Utama 1,
59000 Kuala Lumpur
There are two towers in Menara UOA Bangsar and MyIPO is located in Tower B, first floor.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
International Search Authorities in 2009
Each PCT application must undergo an international search carried out by one of the International Searching Authorities (ISA). Receiving Offices have agreements with at least one but sometimes several ISAs for carrying out international searches. Where a Receiving Office has an agreement with multiple ISAs, the PCT applicant must select one of them. Malaysia has nominated European Patent Office, Australia and Korea.
Once the ISA has performed the search, the applicant will receive an International Search Report (ISR) that contains a list of documents relevant for assessing the patentability of the invention. In addition, the ISA establishes a written opinion containing a detailed analysis of the patentability of the invention.
The distribution of Top 10 ISRs in 2009:
1. European Patent Office: 70,232. Language: English, French, German, Dutch
Fee: EUR 1,700
2. Japan: 28,613. Language: English, Japanese
Fee: JPY 97,000
3. Korea: 21,755. Language: English, Korean
Fee: KRW 900,000 (for English), KRW 450,000 (for Korean)
4. USA: 15,514. Language: English
Fee: USD 2,080
5. China: 8,146. Language: English, Chinese
Fee: CNY 2,100
6. Australia: 2,666. Language: English
Fee: AUD 1,600
7. Canada: 2,065. Language: English, French
Fee: CAD 1,600
8. Sweeden: 2,050. Language: Danish, English, Finnish, French, Norwegian, Swedish
Fee: SEK 18,000
9. Austria: 1,544. Language: English, French, German, Hungarian, Russian
Fee: EUR 200
10. Spain 1,358. Language: Spanish
Fee: EUR 1,700
European Patent Office (EPO) is the most popular ISA due to its wide recognition. Note that most of the ISA has revised their fee for 2010.
The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) is increasingly used notably by applicants from the US and Malaysia. KIPO has a patent prosecution highway agreement with USPTO. By 2009, over 60% of searches carried out by KIPO were done for applicants from the US. In 2009, only 30% of US applicants selected the USPTO as the ISA, with 30% of applicants selecting KIPO and the remaining 40% opting for the EPO.
In practice, since the technical preparation for publishing a PCT application takes approximately one month and should finish 15 days before the publication date, the establishment of the ISR within 16 months from the priority date still allows the IB to publish the ISR with the application document. ISRs received at IB after technical preparation of the PCT applications they relate to are published separately later.
Australia has a good timeliness by preparing 87% of ISR within 17 months, compared to Korea which only manages to prepare 27% of ISR within 17 months. The EPO manages to prepare 56% of ISR within 17 months.
Once the ISA has performed the search, the applicant will receive an International Search Report (ISR) that contains a list of documents relevant for assessing the patentability of the invention. In addition, the ISA establishes a written opinion containing a detailed analysis of the patentability of the invention.
The distribution of Top 10 ISRs in 2009:
1. European Patent Office: 70,232. Language: English, French, German, Dutch
Fee: EUR 1,700
2. Japan: 28,613. Language: English, Japanese
Fee: JPY 97,000
3. Korea: 21,755. Language: English, Korean
Fee: KRW 900,000 (for English), KRW 450,000 (for Korean)
4. USA: 15,514. Language: English
Fee: USD 2,080
5. China: 8,146. Language: English, Chinese
Fee: CNY 2,100
6. Australia: 2,666. Language: English
Fee: AUD 1,600
7. Canada: 2,065. Language: English, French
Fee: CAD 1,600
8. Sweeden: 2,050. Language: Danish, English, Finnish, French, Norwegian, Swedish
Fee: SEK 18,000
9. Austria: 1,544. Language: English, French, German, Hungarian, Russian
Fee: EUR 200
10. Spain 1,358. Language: Spanish
Fee: EUR 1,700
European Patent Office (EPO) is the most popular ISA due to its wide recognition. Note that most of the ISA has revised their fee for 2010.
The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) is increasingly used notably by applicants from the US and Malaysia. KIPO has a patent prosecution highway agreement with USPTO. By 2009, over 60% of searches carried out by KIPO were done for applicants from the US. In 2009, only 30% of US applicants selected the USPTO as the ISA, with 30% of applicants selecting KIPO and the remaining 40% opting for the EPO.
In practice, since the technical preparation for publishing a PCT application takes approximately one month and should finish 15 days before the publication date, the establishment of the ISR within 16 months from the priority date still allows the IB to publish the ISR with the application document. ISRs received at IB after technical preparation of the PCT applications they relate to are published separately later.
Australia has a good timeliness by preparing 87% of ISR within 17 months, compared to Korea which only manages to prepare 27% of ISR within 17 months. The EPO manages to prepare 56% of ISR within 17 months.
Top PCT Applicants: University Sector 2009
The top 10 PCT applicants in the world from the university sector in 2009:
1. University of California, US, 321 applications
2. MIT, US, 145 applications
3. University of Texas, US, 126 applications
4. Colombia University, US, 110 applications
5. Harvard, US, 109 applications
6. University of Florida, US, 103 applications
7. University of Tokyo, JP, 94 applications
8. John Hopkins University, US, 87 applications
9. University of Pennsylvania, US, 80 applications
10. University of Utah, US, 66 applications
Nine out of ten universities are based in US while the other one is based in JP. Interestingly NUS made it to the top 10 PCT applicants in Asia from the university sector in 2009:
1. University of Tokyo, JP, 94 applications
2. Yonsei University, KR, 50 applications
3. Seoul National University, KR, 49 applications
4. Kyoto University, JP, 45 applications
5. Korea Advanced Institute of Science & Technology, KR, 43 applications
6. Tohoku University, JP, 39 applications
6. Postech Foundation, KR, 39 applications
8. Osaka University, JP, 38 applications
9. Keio University, JP, 34 applications
10. National University of Singapore, SG, 32 applications
The are 5 JP, 4 KR and 1 SG universities in the top 10 Asian universities.
1. University of California, US, 321 applications
2. MIT, US, 145 applications
3. University of Texas, US, 126 applications
4. Colombia University, US, 110 applications
5. Harvard, US, 109 applications
6. University of Florida, US, 103 applications
7. University of Tokyo, JP, 94 applications
8. John Hopkins University, US, 87 applications
9. University of Pennsylvania, US, 80 applications
10. University of Utah, US, 66 applications
Nine out of ten universities are based in US while the other one is based in JP. Interestingly NUS made it to the top 10 PCT applicants in Asia from the university sector in 2009:
1. University of Tokyo, JP, 94 applications
2. Yonsei University, KR, 50 applications
3. Seoul National University, KR, 49 applications
4. Kyoto University, JP, 45 applications
5. Korea Advanced Institute of Science & Technology, KR, 43 applications
6. Tohoku University, JP, 39 applications
6. Postech Foundation, KR, 39 applications
8. Osaka University, JP, 38 applications
9. Keio University, JP, 34 applications
10. National University of Singapore, SG, 32 applications
The are 5 JP, 4 KR and 1 SG universities in the top 10 Asian universities.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Malaysia's First Invention Reality Show
Malaysia will host an invention reality show which will start from 25 September 2010. The program called "TV Idea: Malaysian Inventors Challenge," billed as Malaysia's first invention reality show, aims to look for the best innovation among grass root Malaysians. Ten episodes of approximately 30 minutes program featuring preliminary selection and finals are being scheduled to be aired by TV3, every Saturday at 7pm. National astronaut Major Dr Faiz Khaleed and Daphne Iking have been identified as the host of the program. The invention reality show is a joint effort between Sirim, Proton and Ministry of Science. The organizers are looking for invention entries for the preliminary rounds. Interested individuals or group may get more information here. The finals will feature 24 entries which may potentially receive government grants and assistance to develop and patent the invention.
Friday, August 20, 2010
A Tribute to the Man behind the Swatch
The world famous Swiss watch industry lost a leading figure recently with the death of Mr. Nicolas G. Hayek on June 28, aged 82. Mr. Hayek was born on February 19, 1928, in Lebanon and at the age of seven emigrated to Switzerland, where he became a Swiss citizen.
A pioneering and charismatic entrepreneur, Mr. Hayek, co-founder and former Chairman of the Swatch Group, is widely credited with reviving the Swiss watch industry in the 1980s when it was under threat from mass-produced, low-cost electronic timepieces. The innovative strategies he implemented in the early 1980s breathed new life into the entire Swiss watch industry, enabling it to regain its leading position worldwide. The industry, Switzerland’s third largest exporter after the machine and chemical industries, sells nearly 95 percent of its production to overseas markets.
Mr. Hayek was a decisive force in the launch in 1983 of the Swatch watch, an icon of popular culture.
In developing the Swatch phenomenon, Mr. Hayek’s unique entrepreneurial talent combined “disposability, affordability and reliability” to deliver a range of colorful, trendy and low-cost plastic watches for every occasion. The Swatch’s innovative mechanism has only 51 parts compared to the over 91 parts in a conventional watch. Its avant-garde designs made Swatch a fashion statement. Its low cost means that fashion-conscious consumers can own several Swatches to suit mood and occasion. In a recent interview, Mr. Hayek said, “I am not making watches only to look at the time. I am making jewels! They are jewels!”
Today Swatch launches some 300 designs a year and is one of the largest users of WIPO’s Hague System for the International Registration of Industrial Designs which offers a cost-effective way to protect designs internationally by filing a single application, in one language (English, French or Spanish) and in one currency (Swiss francs). About half of the designs Swatch launches each year are phased out after six months, making them highly collectible. A 1988 fake-fur Swatch is reported to have been recently valued at £18,500 (approx. US$28,316).
Mr. Hayek was a master of marketing, introducing simple ideas to leverage the reputation, prestige and exclusivity of the Swatch Group’s stable of 19 watch brands, including Breguet, Calvin Klein, Longines, Tissot and Omega. In a recent interview with the Indian daily MINT, Mr. Hayek outlined the company’s approach to branding. “We have a unique message for each of our brands. This is a very strong part of how we operate”. For example, the message for the Jaquet-Droz brand is “Eternity - the Ultimate Luxury”. The Swatch Group is a regular user of WIPO’s Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks, a user-friendly and cost-effective option for registering and managing trademarks internationally.
Full article -WIPO Magazine
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Faiza Cannot Use "Ponni" Label, Rules Court
The High Court here Tuesday ruled that Faiza Sdn Bhd cannot use the "ponni" label for its rice products.
Judge Datuk Azahar Mohamed made the ruling after allowing an application by Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority of India (APEDA) an four others to nullify the trademark used by the company.
He also ordered that the Registrar of Trademarks remove Faiza's "ponni" label from its register.
In his judgement, Azahar said 'ponni' rice was produced in the Kaveri Delta in India that Faiza did not have the right to register it as its own trademark.
"To sum up, I concluded that the entry of 'ponni' trade mark in the register of trade marks in Malaysia is an entry wrongfully made and wrongfully remaining in the registry.
"All material times, the name "ponni" was used consistently and extensively world wide and in Malaysia for a particular variety of rice originating from the trade mark region in India," he said.
He added that the 'ponni' as a result of such consistent and extensive use became distinctive of such variety of rice worldwide and Malaysia.
"The word 'ponni' is not an invented word of the Malaysian company. In Tamil the word "ponni" is gold as rice is precious and "ponni" is a recognisable name of rice variety originating from Tamil Nadu.
"The name 'ponni' does not qualify for registration as it prevents others from legitimately using the particular rice and the respondent is not entitled to register the word "ponni" as a trade mark," he said.
In their civil action filed on Jan 22, APEDA, Universiti Pertanian Tamil Nadu, two farmers from India, and business entities Visnukumar Traders Pvt.Ltd and K.K Imports and Exports had named Faiza Sdn Bhd as the respondent.
The plaintiffs wanted the court to order the "ponni" trade mark with registration number No 00007172 to be voided and removed from the Malaysian Trade Marks Registry and gazetted as such.
Faiza Sdn Bhd's marketing and sales manager Fazaruddin Ibrahim had told the court that the company received approval to use the trade mark on June 6, 2000 from the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia.
He said the company had spent a sizable sum of money to obtain the trade mark and popularise it among consumers.
He added that the company had no ulterior motives in using the trade mark and had never denied the geographical origin of "ponni" rice.
The plaintiffs were represented by counsel Karen Abraham while Faiza Sdn Bhd by counsel A. Chinnapalanidevi. -Bernama
Judge Datuk Azahar Mohamed made the ruling after allowing an application by Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority of India (APEDA) an four others to nullify the trademark used by the company.
He also ordered that the Registrar of Trademarks remove Faiza's "ponni" label from its register.
In his judgement, Azahar said 'ponni' rice was produced in the Kaveri Delta in India that Faiza did not have the right to register it as its own trademark.
"To sum up, I concluded that the entry of 'ponni' trade mark in the register of trade marks in Malaysia is an entry wrongfully made and wrongfully remaining in the registry.
"All material times, the name "ponni" was used consistently and extensively world wide and in Malaysia for a particular variety of rice originating from the trade mark region in India," he said.
He added that the 'ponni' as a result of such consistent and extensive use became distinctive of such variety of rice worldwide and Malaysia.
"The word 'ponni' is not an invented word of the Malaysian company. In Tamil the word "ponni" is gold as rice is precious and "ponni" is a recognisable name of rice variety originating from Tamil Nadu.
"The name 'ponni' does not qualify for registration as it prevents others from legitimately using the particular rice and the respondent is not entitled to register the word "ponni" as a trade mark," he said.
In their civil action filed on Jan 22, APEDA, Universiti Pertanian Tamil Nadu, two farmers from India, and business entities Visnukumar Traders Pvt.Ltd and K.K Imports and Exports had named Faiza Sdn Bhd as the respondent.
The plaintiffs wanted the court to order the "ponni" trade mark with registration number No 00007172 to be voided and removed from the Malaysian Trade Marks Registry and gazetted as such.
Faiza Sdn Bhd's marketing and sales manager Fazaruddin Ibrahim had told the court that the company received approval to use the trade mark on June 6, 2000 from the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia.
He said the company had spent a sizable sum of money to obtain the trade mark and popularise it among consumers.
He added that the company had no ulterior motives in using the trade mark and had never denied the geographical origin of "ponni" rice.
The plaintiffs were represented by counsel Karen Abraham while Faiza Sdn Bhd by counsel A. Chinnapalanidevi. -Bernama
Thursday, July 15, 2010
MyID and MyCoID
This is probably the first announcement by newly appointed Director General Azizan Mohamad Sidin.
To all our valued customers, in line with the Governments initiative on the usage of MyID and MyCoID in the public sector agencies, the Patent Department and the Trade Marks Department of the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia will enforce the usage of the following:
1. MyID number (MyKad) - if the applicant is an individual or partnership; or
2. MyCoID company registration number- if the applicant is a company
as a personal reference number for any Trade Marks applications and Patent applications effective 12 July 2010. You may register the MyID/MyCoID via PANTAS online or MyIPO service counter. For search and query for applications using MyID/MyCoID, it can be made via the Application Status Enquiry.
For the purpose of the above, kindly write the MyID/MyCoID number after the applicant’s name on each and every form relating to Trade Marks and Patent applications filed with MyIPO.
Azizan Mohamad Sidin
Director General
Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia
8 July 2010
To all our valued customers, in line with the Governments initiative on the usage of MyID and MyCoID in the public sector agencies, the Patent Department and the Trade Marks Department of the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia will enforce the usage of the following:
1. MyID number (MyKad) - if the applicant is an individual or partnership; or
2. MyCoID company registration number- if the applicant is a company
as a personal reference number for any Trade Marks applications and Patent applications effective 12 July 2010. You may register the MyID/MyCoID via PANTAS online or MyIPO service counter. For search and query for applications using MyID/MyCoID, it can be made via the Application Status Enquiry.
For the purpose of the above, kindly write the MyID/MyCoID number after the applicant’s name on each and every form relating to Trade Marks and Patent applications filed with MyIPO.
Azizan Mohamad Sidin
Director General
Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia
8 July 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Azizan Appointed as New Director General of MyIPO
Azizan Mohamad Sidin, 50, was appointed as Director General and Member of Perbadanan Harta Intelek Malaysia on 1 July 2010.
He holds a Bachelor Degree of Science (Agribusiness) from University Pertanian Malaysia and Masters of Science (Economics) from University of Arkansas, USA.
His extensive experience in administering and managing of an organization has made him a household name in civil service. Started his career as Marketing Officer at Malaysian Timber Industry Board in 1984 before he was appointed as Assistant Secretary at Ministry of Primary Industries in 1988. He was later appointed as Assistant Director at Economic Planning Unit at the Prime Minister’s Department in 1994 and as Head of Assistant Director at Privatization and Economic Section, Office of the Secretary to Government Selangor in 2000.
He was appointed as Yang Dipertua (Mayor) of Sepang Municipal Council on 01 November 2005 before continuing his career at MyIPO. - MyIPO
Friday, June 11, 2010
Attracting investments in innovation via incentives (10MP)
THE Government will create incentives and opportunities for Malaysian companies to invest in innovation, through the public procurement process and the design of regulations.
An improved public procurement process is a key opportunity to increase the level of innovation in Malaysian companies.
Regulatory change is a key driver of innovation as firms compete to develop new products that are more efficient, greener and safer. Other advanced economies have created leading global companies through regulatory reforms that have forced innovative solutions.
Several regulatory changes are expected to drive innovation.
The innovation institutional structure and intellectual property (IP) regime will be strengthened as they are critical innovation enablers.
A review of the institutional structure supporting innovation and research and development (R&D) is imperative to improve innovation outcomes.
The IP regime, including the expertise and institutional capacity of IP examiners and agents, will be upgraded to improve the investment climate and investor confidence and provide a dynamic environment for the creation of new and innovative products and services.
To further improve the protection regime and shorten the application and approval process for trademarks (from 15 months to 12 months) and patents (from 39 months to 32 months), Web-based facilities will be provided including a voluntary registration system for copyright protection and a patent search database.
To incentivise the filing and maintenance of IP, the Government will make available grants and preferential rate loans.
The Government will support R&D and commercialisation across the value chain under a number of initiatives. It will strengthen the risk capital industry to increase access to funding for innovative start-ups.
New funding modes for public venture companies will be introduced to better match investment risk profiles and promote greater private sector participated and risk-taking. Government funding to public venture companies, Malaysian Technology Development Corp (MTDC) and Malaysian Venture Capital Management Bhd will shift from the current leading model to an equity structure.
A Mudharabah Innovation Fund (MIF) with an allocation of RM500mil, will also be introduced to provide risk capital to government-backed venture companies.
The MIF will offer enhanced risk return profile to investors and attract more private risk capital to co-invest, and gradually reduce dependence on public funds. To bridge the gap between invention and commercialisation of high-technology products, the Government will establish a Business Growth Fund with an allocation of RM150mil.
The fund will focus on supporting companies commercialising public sector research results and will provide hybrid grant-equity funding.
Existing public venture-capital initiatives will be rationalised. MTDC, will be restructured to focus on nurturing technology transfer and commercialise, while a new technology investment company will be set up to manage funds and investments transferred from MTDC and Khazanah Nasional Bhd.
The Government will continue to fund innovation by allowing tax deductions for R&D and providing matching grants to promote private sector funding of R&D and commercialisation.
A dedicated programme known as 1-InnoCERT, which assesses the innovation level of enterprises, will further stimulate R&D activities through funding incentives such as access to preferential rate loans, credit guarantees and grants. - The Star
An improved public procurement process is a key opportunity to increase the level of innovation in Malaysian companies.
Regulatory change is a key driver of innovation as firms compete to develop new products that are more efficient, greener and safer. Other advanced economies have created leading global companies through regulatory reforms that have forced innovative solutions.
Several regulatory changes are expected to drive innovation.
The innovation institutional structure and intellectual property (IP) regime will be strengthened as they are critical innovation enablers.
A review of the institutional structure supporting innovation and research and development (R&D) is imperative to improve innovation outcomes.
The IP regime, including the expertise and institutional capacity of IP examiners and agents, will be upgraded to improve the investment climate and investor confidence and provide a dynamic environment for the creation of new and innovative products and services.
To further improve the protection regime and shorten the application and approval process for trademarks (from 15 months to 12 months) and patents (from 39 months to 32 months), Web-based facilities will be provided including a voluntary registration system for copyright protection and a patent search database.
To incentivise the filing and maintenance of IP, the Government will make available grants and preferential rate loans.
The Government will support R&D and commercialisation across the value chain under a number of initiatives. It will strengthen the risk capital industry to increase access to funding for innovative start-ups.
New funding modes for public venture companies will be introduced to better match investment risk profiles and promote greater private sector participated and risk-taking. Government funding to public venture companies, Malaysian Technology Development Corp (MTDC) and Malaysian Venture Capital Management Bhd will shift from the current leading model to an equity structure.
A Mudharabah Innovation Fund (MIF) with an allocation of RM500mil, will also be introduced to provide risk capital to government-backed venture companies.
The MIF will offer enhanced risk return profile to investors and attract more private risk capital to co-invest, and gradually reduce dependence on public funds. To bridge the gap between invention and commercialisation of high-technology products, the Government will establish a Business Growth Fund with an allocation of RM150mil.
The fund will focus on supporting companies commercialising public sector research results and will provide hybrid grant-equity funding.
Existing public venture-capital initiatives will be rationalised. MTDC, will be restructured to focus on nurturing technology transfer and commercialise, while a new technology investment company will be set up to manage funds and investments transferred from MTDC and Khazanah Nasional Bhd.
The Government will continue to fund innovation by allowing tax deductions for R&D and providing matching grants to promote private sector funding of R&D and commercialisation.
A dedicated programme known as 1-InnoCERT, which assesses the innovation level of enterprises, will further stimulate R&D activities through funding incentives such as access to preferential rate loans, credit guarantees and grants. - The Star
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Sabah’s shopping complex wins legal right to use ‘Suria’
The state’s latest shopping mall has won the legal right to use the word “Suria” after the High Court here dismissed a suit by Kuala Lumpur-based Suria KLCC Sdn Bhd against its use.
Suria KLCC filed the suit in 2009 against Makamewah Sdn Bhd, the developer and operator of Suria Sabah mall here, seeking damages and an injunction for the Sabah firm to stop using the “Suria” name and logo in its trade.
In dismissing the suit, Judicial Commissioner Stephen Chung held that the company had failed to prove that Makamewah’s act and conduct amounted to misrepresentation that would cause actual damage to its business.
He also held that Suria KLCC did not have monopoly or exclusive use of the word “Suria” as it was a common word and not invented.
In his 10-page ruling, Chung said the Suria KLCC’s trademark registration provided protection for the words “Suria” and “KLCC” when they are used together along with the swirl device or logo as a distinctive mark.
He added that Suria KLCC also operated two other shopping malls, the Alamanda Shopping Centre in Putrajaya and Mesra Mall in Terengganu.
“It is pertinent to note that these shopping malls are not known as ‘Suria Putrajaya’ or ‘Suria Terengganu’ or use the word ‘Suria’ as part of their name.
“There is no shopping mall chain in Malaysia which uses the word ‘Suria’ as part of its name,” Chung held.
Suria KLCC had claimed that Makamewah’s use of the word “Suria” in Suria Sabah and the use of the swirl logo were likely to cause confusion and deception among the business community and the public.
Suria Sabah opened over six months ago. - the Star
Suria KLCC filed the suit in 2009 against Makamewah Sdn Bhd, the developer and operator of Suria Sabah mall here, seeking damages and an injunction for the Sabah firm to stop using the “Suria” name and logo in its trade.
In dismissing the suit, Judicial Commissioner Stephen Chung held that the company had failed to prove that Makamewah’s act and conduct amounted to misrepresentation that would cause actual damage to its business.
He also held that Suria KLCC did not have monopoly or exclusive use of the word “Suria” as it was a common word and not invented.
In his 10-page ruling, Chung said the Suria KLCC’s trademark registration provided protection for the words “Suria” and “KLCC” when they are used together along with the swirl device or logo as a distinctive mark.
He added that Suria KLCC also operated two other shopping malls, the Alamanda Shopping Centre in Putrajaya and Mesra Mall in Terengganu.
“It is pertinent to note that these shopping malls are not known as ‘Suria Putrajaya’ or ‘Suria Terengganu’ or use the word ‘Suria’ as part of their name.
“There is no shopping mall chain in Malaysia which uses the word ‘Suria’ as part of its name,” Chung held.
Suria KLCC had claimed that Makamewah’s use of the word “Suria” in Suria Sabah and the use of the swirl logo were likely to cause confusion and deception among the business community and the public.
Suria Sabah opened over six months ago. - the Star
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Protection of slogans – the Madrid System
The WIPO-administered Madrid system for the international registration of marks is an international procedural mechanism that offers trademark owners the possibility to obtain protection for their marks in several countries, by simply filing one application through their national office. The granting of protection in each country that is designated in an international registration, including those of marks incorporating slogans, is determined by the corresponding national trademark office, in the light of the applicable legislation.
The Madrid system allows for the international registration of various types of marks, among them, those resulting from the combination of letters or words, which – of course – include the possibility of registering slogans. Slogans registered using the Madrid system include, for example,
* “Have it your way,” registered by the Burger King Corporation to distinguish hamburgers, steak and fish sandwiches and other related products;
* “Chesterfield: Être absolument femme,” (Chesterfield: Be absolutely woman) registered by DIM to distinguish, among others, ladies' lingerie;
* “We’re talkin’ serious”, registered by Ford’s Foods, Inc. to distinguish sauces and salsa used in cooking or with chips;
* “Style on skin,” registered by Lacoste to distinguish, clothes, footwear and head wear;
* “Longines l’élégance du temps depuis 1832,” (Longines, time elegance since 1832) registered by the Longines Watch Company to distinguish watches and chronometric instruments; and
* "Passionate about creativity,” registered by LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton to distinguish various clothing and accessories products. -WIPO
The Madrid system allows for the international registration of various types of marks, among them, those resulting from the combination of letters or words, which – of course – include the possibility of registering slogans. Slogans registered using the Madrid system include, for example,
* “Have it your way,” registered by the Burger King Corporation to distinguish hamburgers, steak and fish sandwiches and other related products;
* “Chesterfield: Être absolument femme,” (Chesterfield: Be absolutely woman) registered by DIM to distinguish, among others, ladies' lingerie;
* “We’re talkin’ serious”, registered by Ford’s Foods, Inc. to distinguish sauces and salsa used in cooking or with chips;
* “Style on skin,” registered by Lacoste to distinguish, clothes, footwear and head wear;
* “Longines l’élégance du temps depuis 1832,” (Longines, time elegance since 1832) registered by the Longines Watch Company to distinguish watches and chronometric instruments; and
* "Passionate about creativity,” registered by LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton to distinguish various clothing and accessories products. -WIPO
L’Oréal, Because you're worth it
The famous l’Oréal slogan “Because you’re worth it,” registered at the USPTO in 1976, has evolved with the company’s customers over the years. “Parce que je le vaux bien” and its English translation “Because I’m worth it” became popular in the late 1990s. In 2004, l’Oréal advertising started targeting the ever-growing cosmetics market for men with “Because you’re worth it too.” Then in 2009, their advertising started using “Because we’re worth it” and for kids “Because we’re worth it too.” The shift to “we” followed a psychology-based study of l’Oréal’s consumer base. "We" apparently creates stronger consumer involvement in l'Oréal’s philosophy and lifestyle and provides more perceived consumer satisfaction with l'Oréal products.
As l'Oréal celebrated its 100th anniversary in 2009, it continued to re-create itself, making ever stronger trademarks. A simple Madrid system database search yields 1,892 international trademark registrations for l’Oréal. The company also seeks to remain at the cutting edge of the cosmetics and beauty industry through research and development. It is reportedly the top nanotechnology patent-holder in the U.S. -WIPO
As l'Oréal celebrated its 100th anniversary in 2009, it continued to re-create itself, making ever stronger trademarks. A simple Madrid system database search yields 1,892 international trademark registrations for l’Oréal. The company also seeks to remain at the cutting edge of the cosmetics and beauty industry through research and development. It is reportedly the top nanotechnology patent-holder in the U.S. -WIPO
WIPO Unveils New Logo
WIPO unveiled its new logo on April 26, 2010 – a date which marks the 40th anniversary of the entry into force of the WIPO Convention and the 10th anniversary of World Intellectual Property Day. The new logo forms the cornerstone of a new visual identity for the Organization, in line with the new directions being taken to keep pace with the rapid evolution of intellectual property in the 21st century.
The new logo reflects the Organization’s dynamism and innovative spirit, and is a powerful symbol of WIPO’s revitalization and strategic reorientation. It is based on a graphic representation of the WIPO headquarters’ building, an iconic structure familiar to all WIPO member states and stakeholders. The color blue links the Organization with the United Nations. The seven curved lines represent the seven elements of IP, as set out in the WIPO Convention. -WIPO
Muhyiddin urges inventors to file patents early
Inventors and owners of intellectual property should file their patents early to protect their exclusive rights to a product.
Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, who said this, also urged patent owners to seek worldwide exclusive rights to their inventions.
“This is to prevent anyone from claiming the rights to intellectual property owned by the locals,” he told reporters after presenting awards at the National Intellectual Property Award 2010 yesterday.
He said patent registration could be filed through the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO), which provides worldwide patent coverage.
Earlier in his speech, Muhyiddin said the people, especially small and medium entrepreneurs, should fully utilise the country’s intellectual property potential in order to be competitive and innovative as well as to enhance market access.
Muhyiddin said Malaysia planned to reduce the patent registration period even further, from 39 months this year to 36 months in 2011 and 32 months by 2012.
Later at the National Chamber of Commerce and Industry forum on China-Malaysia economic and business relations, the Deputy Prime Minister said China’s rapid development and movement to high-level technology meant that Asean countries must move to add value to their products through research. He also told local corporations not to make too much demands to be shielded from competition from China.
“I want to emphasise that protectionism is not the answer. We have seen time and again that industries that do not adjust and adapt to new business realities end up in a never-ending cycle of dependency,” he said. -the Star
Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, who said this, also urged patent owners to seek worldwide exclusive rights to their inventions.
“This is to prevent anyone from claiming the rights to intellectual property owned by the locals,” he told reporters after presenting awards at the National Intellectual Property Award 2010 yesterday.
He said patent registration could be filed through the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO), which provides worldwide patent coverage.
Earlier in his speech, Muhyiddin said the people, especially small and medium entrepreneurs, should fully utilise the country’s intellectual property potential in order to be competitive and innovative as well as to enhance market access.
Muhyiddin said Malaysia planned to reduce the patent registration period even further, from 39 months this year to 36 months in 2011 and 32 months by 2012.
Later at the National Chamber of Commerce and Industry forum on China-Malaysia economic and business relations, the Deputy Prime Minister said China’s rapid development and movement to high-level technology meant that Asean countries must move to add value to their products through research. He also told local corporations not to make too much demands to be shielded from competition from China.
“I want to emphasise that protectionism is not the answer. We have seen time and again that industries that do not adjust and adapt to new business realities end up in a never-ending cycle of dependency,” he said. -the Star
Friday, April 23, 2010
National IP Day, April 26 - 27, 2010
MyIPO is organizing an exhibition and public seminar for National IP Day.
April 26
8.30 am - 12 pm National IP Day Award Ceremony
Public Seminar
2.30 pm IP
3.00 pm Patent
3.30 pm Trademark
4.00 pm Design
4.30 pm Copyright
5.00 pm Geographical Indication
April 27
9.00 am IP Exploitation story overseas: Tokyo, Australia
10.15 am IP Exploitation story Malaysia: Les Copaque, Serenity Spa, CHD
11.30 am Counterfeiting
2.15 pm Financing
3.30 pm IP Clinic
April 26
8.30 am - 12 pm National IP Day Award Ceremony
Public Seminar
2.30 pm IP
3.00 pm Patent
3.30 pm Trademark
4.00 pm Design
4.30 pm Copyright
5.00 pm Geographical Indication
April 27
9.00 am IP Exploitation story overseas: Tokyo, Australia
10.15 am IP Exploitation story Malaysia: Les Copaque, Serenity Spa, CHD
11.30 am Counterfeiting
2.15 pm Financing
3.30 pm IP Clinic
Monday, April 19, 2010
Understanding the Significance of Intellectual Property
Celebration to focus on creativity and innovation, this April 26.
National IP day (Hari Harta Intelek Negara, HHIN) this year promises exciting initiatives, especially to the creative and innovative groups, fellow artists are expected to get rewarded with new royalty incentive scheme.
The celebration on April 26, also simultaneously with 2010 Declaration of Malaysia Innovative celebrates New Economic Model (NEM), which emphasizes the element of creativity and innovation in a comprehensive manner.
Minister of Domestic Trade, and Consumer Co-operatives, Datuk Ismail Sabri, keen on touching the issue of creativity and innovation, let alone this year's campaign focuses on small and medium enterprises (SMEs), as there is still a large percentage of entrepreneurs of SMEs who do not know the importance of protecting their intellectual property, whether in terms of patents, trademarks, industrial designs, copyrights and geographical indications.
"The rationale of the campaign and the Proclamation of Malaysia Innovative in 2010 aims to raise awareness about the need to respect intellectual property rights as we respect the rights of property of others.
"It also aims to recognize the contributions of innovators in the development of the economy. Long-term goals of the campaign is to achieve an innovative and creative culture (shift from consumers to producers of intellectual property), to respect intellectual property rights and enhance the competitiveness of the country," he said of the celebration which will be officiated by Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Mohd Yassin .
Many wonder what is intellectual property, its main components, as well as acts involved in this matter.
Simple definition of intellectual property are the creations of mind either in the design, symbols, names and designs used in commerce as well as literary and artistic works, while the components involve patents, trademarks, industrial designs, geographical indications, copyright and layout set of integrated circuits. The Act providing protection for intellectual property in Malaysia involves the Trade Marks Act 1976, Patents Act 1983, Copyright Act 1987, Industrial Designs Act 1996, Geographical Indications Act 2000, and Integrated Circuits Layout Act 2000.
Replying to questions on the status of the amendment of laws and acts of intellectual property today, Ismail said, the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO) is conducting a review of the intellectual property acts and targets bringing amendments for first reading in Parliament.
Among the amendments involved are the Copyright Act 1987 and Industrial Designs Act 1996, in June, while the 1983 Patent Act and the Trade Marks Act 1976 in November.
Each patent will be protected for 20 years from the year it is filed; Trademark protected for 10 years and is renewable every 10 years; for Industrial Designs five years from the filing date and can be extended up to 15 years, and Geography Indication 10 years and renewable for every 10 years.
For issues involving copyright, no registration is required; protection for literature, music and art is provided for the life of the author and 50 years after his death; for other works of protection is 50 years from publication.
As for integrated circuit layout, no registration is required. Protection is 10 years from the day it was exploited or 15 years from the date created should the circuit is not commercialized.
All intellectual property protection (except copyright and integrated circuit layout) is territorial and it is not automatically protected in other countries. This means that registration should be performed in every country where protection is needed.
Ismail said that to expedite the registration of intellectual property, MyIPO is upgrading infrastructure and information technology (IT) training of more examiners and reviewing the acts of intellectual property so that it is current and meets the needs of the international treaty.
"MyIPO provides an online application system to facilitate registration of patents and trademarks. Online search systems have been developed for public search."
"Mindful that awareness about intellectual property is still low, many programs are held such as seminars, exhibitions and publications. HHIN is one of the intellectual property awareness activities that provides impact in terms of increasing the local application," he said.
In addition to the common component of the intellectual property, other components of intellectual property is traditional knowledge, genetic resources and folklore.
Traditional knowledge and genetic resources of traditional knowledge refers to the results of intellectual activity in the context of traditional medical knowledge and knowledge based on genetic resources. Folklore is more focused on the creative process that reflects the identity, history and culture of a community, such as songs and folk dances, traditional costumes.
The most interesting approach is HHIN response to be taken to address the issue of transparency of parties dissatisfaction in royalties collection, which involves the majority of entertainment industry.
"The ministry has conducted a dialogue with the parties involved (composer, musician, singer, record companies, karaoke outlet owner) and taking into account the views of various parties to the amendment of the Copyright Act 1976. Decisions have also have been made to propose the Tribunal Copyright Act.
"We almost did not believe upon learning that popular singers such as Mawi receiving royalties of only RM450 per year. Meanwhile, the modus operandi of company that collects royalties are not known," said Ismail, who will continue their discussion with parties involved in the entertainment industry in the near term. -translated from Berita Harian
National IP day (Hari Harta Intelek Negara, HHIN) this year promises exciting initiatives, especially to the creative and innovative groups, fellow artists are expected to get rewarded with new royalty incentive scheme.
The celebration on April 26, also simultaneously with 2010 Declaration of Malaysia Innovative celebrates New Economic Model (NEM), which emphasizes the element of creativity and innovation in a comprehensive manner.
Minister of Domestic Trade, and Consumer Co-operatives, Datuk Ismail Sabri, keen on touching the issue of creativity and innovation, let alone this year's campaign focuses on small and medium enterprises (SMEs), as there is still a large percentage of entrepreneurs of SMEs who do not know the importance of protecting their intellectual property, whether in terms of patents, trademarks, industrial designs, copyrights and geographical indications.
"The rationale of the campaign and the Proclamation of Malaysia Innovative in 2010 aims to raise awareness about the need to respect intellectual property rights as we respect the rights of property of others.
"It also aims to recognize the contributions of innovators in the development of the economy. Long-term goals of the campaign is to achieve an innovative and creative culture (shift from consumers to producers of intellectual property), to respect intellectual property rights and enhance the competitiveness of the country," he said of the celebration which will be officiated by Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Mohd Yassin .
Many wonder what is intellectual property, its main components, as well as acts involved in this matter.
Simple definition of intellectual property are the creations of mind either in the design, symbols, names and designs used in commerce as well as literary and artistic works, while the components involve patents, trademarks, industrial designs, geographical indications, copyright and layout set of integrated circuits. The Act providing protection for intellectual property in Malaysia involves the Trade Marks Act 1976, Patents Act 1983, Copyright Act 1987, Industrial Designs Act 1996, Geographical Indications Act 2000, and Integrated Circuits Layout Act 2000.
Replying to questions on the status of the amendment of laws and acts of intellectual property today, Ismail said, the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO) is conducting a review of the intellectual property acts and targets bringing amendments for first reading in Parliament.
Among the amendments involved are the Copyright Act 1987 and Industrial Designs Act 1996, in June, while the 1983 Patent Act and the Trade Marks Act 1976 in November.
Each patent will be protected for 20 years from the year it is filed; Trademark protected for 10 years and is renewable every 10 years; for Industrial Designs five years from the filing date and can be extended up to 15 years, and Geography Indication 10 years and renewable for every 10 years.
For issues involving copyright, no registration is required; protection for literature, music and art is provided for the life of the author and 50 years after his death; for other works of protection is 50 years from publication.
As for integrated circuit layout, no registration is required. Protection is 10 years from the day it was exploited or 15 years from the date created should the circuit is not commercialized.
All intellectual property protection (except copyright and integrated circuit layout) is territorial and it is not automatically protected in other countries. This means that registration should be performed in every country where protection is needed.
Ismail said that to expedite the registration of intellectual property, MyIPO is upgrading infrastructure and information technology (IT) training of more examiners and reviewing the acts of intellectual property so that it is current and meets the needs of the international treaty.
"MyIPO provides an online application system to facilitate registration of patents and trademarks. Online search systems have been developed for public search."
"Mindful that awareness about intellectual property is still low, many programs are held such as seminars, exhibitions and publications. HHIN is one of the intellectual property awareness activities that provides impact in terms of increasing the local application," he said.
In addition to the common component of the intellectual property, other components of intellectual property is traditional knowledge, genetic resources and folklore.
Traditional knowledge and genetic resources of traditional knowledge refers to the results of intellectual activity in the context of traditional medical knowledge and knowledge based on genetic resources. Folklore is more focused on the creative process that reflects the identity, history and culture of a community, such as songs and folk dances, traditional costumes.
The most interesting approach is HHIN response to be taken to address the issue of transparency of parties dissatisfaction in royalties collection, which involves the majority of entertainment industry.
"The ministry has conducted a dialogue with the parties involved (composer, musician, singer, record companies, karaoke outlet owner) and taking into account the views of various parties to the amendment of the Copyright Act 1976. Decisions have also have been made to propose the Tribunal Copyright Act.
"We almost did not believe upon learning that popular singers such as Mawi receiving royalties of only RM450 per year. Meanwhile, the modus operandi of company that collects royalties are not known," said Ismail, who will continue their discussion with parties involved in the entertainment industry in the near term. -translated from Berita Harian
Intellectual capital as source of wealth
LET me start by paying tribute to the late Tan Sri P. Ramli whose birthday was last week. His songs and movies consoled many of our hearts when we were students overseas, especially during the cold winter.
If he were still alive today he would be a very rich man because every time his film is shown and his song aired, he would collect royalties or fees arising from his ownership of such works (or assets). Unfortunately, he died much too early to benefit from the reawakening to the importance of intellectual properties and assets now.
A nation is said to be rich with natural resources and savings. It can also enrich itself through greater intellectual assets based on creativity and innovation, which come in the form of registered intellectual properties (patents, design, copyrights, new business processes, traditional knowledge and many others) which can be further developed into intangibles. These assets can be bought and sold or franchised for the benefit of the owners.
In the course of economic growth, Malaysia had developed its natural resources into physical assets, and invariably or finally, some forms of financial assets (cash, shares, bonds and other savings). The last two financial crises (1997/98 East Asian contagion, and the financial meltdown of 2009) could have eroded the values of these assets.
It would be good and strategic for our society to increasingly emphasise on the development of intellectual capital in the form of intellectual properties and to commercialise them into products and services. Such an emphasis must be appreciated by all along the value chain, from research to production, marketing and distribution. Along the way, there will be efforts to improve, innovate and do better. For this, there must be a strong innovation system.
There must also be a strong culture to promote and undertake both fundamental and applied research in both public and private sector institutions.
The discoveries and findings of such research can be translated into patents, industrial designs and business processes, and incorporated into new products and services and processes. With the availability of funding and market, the potential to be derived from the development and value creation of these intellectual assets can be significant.
In reality, this is the basis of the prosperity of Silicon Valley in California, the United States which built its reputation on the intellectual capital of Stanford University and the surrounding institutions of higher learning.
It is also apt to say that the well-known Route 128 in the United States was the spillover effects of Harvard, MIT and Boston Universities in its vicinity.
Indeed our ample natural resources can be the basis on which in-depth research is undertaken to form advanced materials and thus fetch higher value than if they are sold in their original state (crude palm oil, for example).
A conducive ecosystem that promotes creativity and innovations will help evolve a corporate culture and institutional framework as well as mindset as to the importance of intellectual assets among us.
Such a system involves appreciation, recognition and serious support from all levels; decision-makers, managers and workers, all working within an ecosystem that encourages an enquiring mind and a readiness to innovate. Malaysia has yet to develop this culture.
The Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumer Affairs Ministry had earlier led the task of implementing the Intellectual Property Policy to ensure that the concern gets its due attention by all. This initiative has to be revisited and appraised as to its impact, if there is any.
Some basic statistics illustrate this point. Our research and development (R&D) expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product is below that of many other countries. Our annual patent registration is much lower than that in South Korea and Taiwan and way behind Japan and the United States and the European Union members.
Even South Korea is quite in the frontline now in content-based industries, an area it was not well known a decade ago (I stand corrected here, though).
In addition, our R&D work is not pervasive among all production units outside our public research entities, except perhaps among the larger government-linked companies (the likes of Petronas).
Even many of our foreign-owned companies are still largely involved in production techniques based on original equipment manufacturing rather than on original design manufacturing and original brand name. The situation among the small and medium industries is even more disheartening especially in the area of creating intellectual assets.
To infuse greater concern for innovation, we may need to promote more start-up funding or venture capital to provide the initial fund and take the risk of new ventures. Given the credit crunch in the developed West, Malaysia should take advantage of the high liquidity at home to provide our venture capital industry with more funding to underwrite new ventures.
At the moment our intellectual asset protection regime under the Malaysian Intellectual Property Organisation is very comprehensive and consistent with the expectations of World Intellectual Property Organisation and World Trade Organisation, so as to give protection to new technology, ideas, and intellectual assets. In this regard, we are ahead of China and several other countries in the region.
In conclusion, I think we have reached a stage where Malaysians should increasingly promote a culture of respect for knowledge, research and intellectual assets, so that these can be given due attention and become sources of wealth creation in the near future.
We need to be more creative and innovative in a positive manner, lest we become a society that does not display much disgust to “cetak rompak” (piracy) activities. My apologies if I sound crude here. -The Star
● The writer is chairman of Malaysian Industrial Development Authority.
If he were still alive today he would be a very rich man because every time his film is shown and his song aired, he would collect royalties or fees arising from his ownership of such works (or assets). Unfortunately, he died much too early to benefit from the reawakening to the importance of intellectual properties and assets now.
A nation is said to be rich with natural resources and savings. It can also enrich itself through greater intellectual assets based on creativity and innovation, which come in the form of registered intellectual properties (patents, design, copyrights, new business processes, traditional knowledge and many others) which can be further developed into intangibles. These assets can be bought and sold or franchised for the benefit of the owners.
In the course of economic growth, Malaysia had developed its natural resources into physical assets, and invariably or finally, some forms of financial assets (cash, shares, bonds and other savings). The last two financial crises (1997/98 East Asian contagion, and the financial meltdown of 2009) could have eroded the values of these assets.
It would be good and strategic for our society to increasingly emphasise on the development of intellectual capital in the form of intellectual properties and to commercialise them into products and services. Such an emphasis must be appreciated by all along the value chain, from research to production, marketing and distribution. Along the way, there will be efforts to improve, innovate and do better. For this, there must be a strong innovation system.
There must also be a strong culture to promote and undertake both fundamental and applied research in both public and private sector institutions.
The discoveries and findings of such research can be translated into patents, industrial designs and business processes, and incorporated into new products and services and processes. With the availability of funding and market, the potential to be derived from the development and value creation of these intellectual assets can be significant.
In reality, this is the basis of the prosperity of Silicon Valley in California, the United States which built its reputation on the intellectual capital of Stanford University and the surrounding institutions of higher learning.
It is also apt to say that the well-known Route 128 in the United States was the spillover effects of Harvard, MIT and Boston Universities in its vicinity.
Indeed our ample natural resources can be the basis on which in-depth research is undertaken to form advanced materials and thus fetch higher value than if they are sold in their original state (crude palm oil, for example).
A conducive ecosystem that promotes creativity and innovations will help evolve a corporate culture and institutional framework as well as mindset as to the importance of intellectual assets among us.
Such a system involves appreciation, recognition and serious support from all levels; decision-makers, managers and workers, all working within an ecosystem that encourages an enquiring mind and a readiness to innovate. Malaysia has yet to develop this culture.
The Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumer Affairs Ministry had earlier led the task of implementing the Intellectual Property Policy to ensure that the concern gets its due attention by all. This initiative has to be revisited and appraised as to its impact, if there is any.
Some basic statistics illustrate this point. Our research and development (R&D) expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product is below that of many other countries. Our annual patent registration is much lower than that in South Korea and Taiwan and way behind Japan and the United States and the European Union members.
Even South Korea is quite in the frontline now in content-based industries, an area it was not well known a decade ago (I stand corrected here, though).
In addition, our R&D work is not pervasive among all production units outside our public research entities, except perhaps among the larger government-linked companies (the likes of Petronas).
Even many of our foreign-owned companies are still largely involved in production techniques based on original equipment manufacturing rather than on original design manufacturing and original brand name. The situation among the small and medium industries is even more disheartening especially in the area of creating intellectual assets.
To infuse greater concern for innovation, we may need to promote more start-up funding or venture capital to provide the initial fund and take the risk of new ventures. Given the credit crunch in the developed West, Malaysia should take advantage of the high liquidity at home to provide our venture capital industry with more funding to underwrite new ventures.
At the moment our intellectual asset protection regime under the Malaysian Intellectual Property Organisation is very comprehensive and consistent with the expectations of World Intellectual Property Organisation and World Trade Organisation, so as to give protection to new technology, ideas, and intellectual assets. In this regard, we are ahead of China and several other countries in the region.
In conclusion, I think we have reached a stage where Malaysians should increasingly promote a culture of respect for knowledge, research and intellectual assets, so that these can be given due attention and become sources of wealth creation in the near future.
We need to be more creative and innovative in a positive manner, lest we become a society that does not display much disgust to “cetak rompak” (piracy) activities. My apologies if I sound crude here. -The Star
● The writer is chairman of Malaysian Industrial Development Authority.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Special Body To Collect Royalty Payments
A special body to collect royalty payments will be set up under the auspices of the Domestic Trade, Cooperative and Consumerism Ministry, the Dewan Rakyat was told Wednesday.
Its minister, Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob said however, it was still being studied by the ministry and the industry.
"I am aware of the dissatisfaction among artists over royalty payments collected by private limited companies, which had never been appointed to represent them," he said when responding to a question from Mohd Yusmadi Mohd Yusoff (PKR-Balik Pulau) when winding up debate on the royal address.
Ismail Sabri said the government planned to review royalty payments, which was fixed some 20 years ago, to suit the changing times.
"As we are amending the Copyright Act 1987, we will also review the royalty rate," he added.
He said royalty payments were fixed by the Public Performance Malaysia Sdn Bhd (PPM), the Music Authors Copyright Protection Berhad (MACP) and the Performers and Artistes Rights (M) Sdn Bhd (PRISM) after consulting the music users association.
Ismail Sabri said however, royalty imposed on entertainment centres was based on the size of the outlets and not on the numbers of chairs and tables they have.
"This is to differentiate and facilitate royalty claims between a big and a small entertainment centre.
"Music users, who are not happy with royalty claims, could complain to the copyright tribunal which was set up in 1999.
"However, to date no complaint was made and we will carry out an advocacy programme to create awareness about the role of the tribunal in ironing out disputes," he said, adding that the tribunal would be beefed up with the amendment to the Copyright Act. -Bernama
Its minister, Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob said however, it was still being studied by the ministry and the industry.
"I am aware of the dissatisfaction among artists over royalty payments collected by private limited companies, which had never been appointed to represent them," he said when responding to a question from Mohd Yusmadi Mohd Yusoff (PKR-Balik Pulau) when winding up debate on the royal address.
Ismail Sabri said the government planned to review royalty payments, which was fixed some 20 years ago, to suit the changing times.
"As we are amending the Copyright Act 1987, we will also review the royalty rate," he added.
He said royalty payments were fixed by the Public Performance Malaysia Sdn Bhd (PPM), the Music Authors Copyright Protection Berhad (MACP) and the Performers and Artistes Rights (M) Sdn Bhd (PRISM) after consulting the music users association.
Ismail Sabri said however, royalty imposed on entertainment centres was based on the size of the outlets and not on the numbers of chairs and tables they have.
"This is to differentiate and facilitate royalty claims between a big and a small entertainment centre.
"Music users, who are not happy with royalty claims, could complain to the copyright tribunal which was set up in 1999.
"However, to date no complaint was made and we will carry out an advocacy programme to create awareness about the role of the tribunal in ironing out disputes," he said, adding that the tribunal would be beefed up with the amendment to the Copyright Act. -Bernama
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
The Real Price of Fakes
A case between Hewlett-Packard and Times Darkhorse Technology Co demonstrates the courts' determination to combat IP crime.
Hewlett-Packard sued Darkhorse Technology for dealing in counterfeit Hewlett-Packard computer printers. The defendant - Chen Shenghui, the manager of Darkhorse Technology - purchased fake Hewlett-Packard printers to sell to his customers. In May 2009 Hewlett-Packard lodged a complaint with the Haidan branch office of the Beijing Administration for Industry and Commerce, which investigated Chen and seized a large number of counterfeit printers. The counterfeit goods discovered at Darkhorse Technology's premises were valued at Rmb1 million.
The case was transferred to the police before being taken up by the Public Prosecutor's Office. In December 2009 Haidian District Court found Darkhorse Technology guilty of the attempted sale of commodities with counterfeit trademarks and fined it Rmb200,000. As the individual directly responsible for the infringement, Chen was sentenced to one year's imprisonment and was fined Rmb150,000. - Wan Hui Da Firm & Intellectual Property Agency
Hewlett-Packard sued Darkhorse Technology for dealing in counterfeit Hewlett-Packard computer printers. The defendant - Chen Shenghui, the manager of Darkhorse Technology - purchased fake Hewlett-Packard printers to sell to his customers. In May 2009 Hewlett-Packard lodged a complaint with the Haidan branch office of the Beijing Administration for Industry and Commerce, which investigated Chen and seized a large number of counterfeit printers. The counterfeit goods discovered at Darkhorse Technology's premises were valued at Rmb1 million.
The case was transferred to the police before being taken up by the Public Prosecutor's Office. In December 2009 Haidian District Court found Darkhorse Technology guilty of the attempted sale of commodities with counterfeit trademarks and fined it Rmb200,000. As the individual directly responsible for the infringement, Chen was sentenced to one year's imprisonment and was fined Rmb150,000. - Wan Hui Da Firm & Intellectual Property Agency
Thursday, March 18, 2010
International Trademark - Profile and Costs of Registrations
The top six in the ranking of most designated member states remained unchanged. China (with 14,766 designations) continues to be the most designated country, followed by the Russian Federation, USA, Switzerland, the European Union and Japan.
The number of designations fell in all designated contracting parties, although a number of countries moved up the list of 40 most designated contracting parties. For example, Viet Nam moved from 24th to 21st position, Bosnia and Herzegovina from 33rd to 26th position, Azerbaijan from 36th to 32nd position, Georgia (from 35th to 33rd position) and Albania (from 40th to 35th position). Two countries entered the top 40 most designated countries in 2009, namely, Iran (37th) and Egypt (39th).
In 2009, on average, about seven Madrid Union members were designated per registration by applicants seeking international trademark protection under the Madrid system. More than half (62%) of these registrations sought protection in five or less export markets.
In submitting a trademark application, an applicant has to specify the goods or services to which the trademark will be applied in accordance with an international classification system known as the “Nice Classification”. The most popular classes of goods and services in international trademark registrations recorded in 2009 were Class 9 (covering, for example, computer hardware and software) representing 8.3% of the total, Class 35 (covering services such as office functions, advertising and business management) which represented 7.1% of the total, Class 42 (covering services provided by for example, scientific, industrial or technological engineers and computer specialists) which represented 5.6% of the total; Class 5 (covering mainly pharmaceuticals and other preparations for medical purposes), Class 25 (covering clothing, footwear and headgear) and Class 41 (covering services in the area of education, training, entertainment, sporting and cultural activities) each represented 4.7% of the total.
In 2009, applicants paid on average 3,408 Swiss francs for an international registration; for 57% of registrations the fees paid were less than 3,000 Swiss francs. - WIPO
The number of designations fell in all designated contracting parties, although a number of countries moved up the list of 40 most designated contracting parties. For example, Viet Nam moved from 24th to 21st position, Bosnia and Herzegovina from 33rd to 26th position, Azerbaijan from 36th to 32nd position, Georgia (from 35th to 33rd position) and Albania (from 40th to 35th position). Two countries entered the top 40 most designated countries in 2009, namely, Iran (37th) and Egypt (39th).
In 2009, on average, about seven Madrid Union members were designated per registration by applicants seeking international trademark protection under the Madrid system. More than half (62%) of these registrations sought protection in five or less export markets.
In submitting a trademark application, an applicant has to specify the goods or services to which the trademark will be applied in accordance with an international classification system known as the “Nice Classification”. The most popular classes of goods and services in international trademark registrations recorded in 2009 were Class 9 (covering, for example, computer hardware and software) representing 8.3% of the total, Class 35 (covering services such as office functions, advertising and business management) which represented 7.1% of the total, Class 42 (covering services provided by for example, scientific, industrial or technological engineers and computer specialists) which represented 5.6% of the total; Class 5 (covering mainly pharmaceuticals and other preparations for medical purposes), Class 25 (covering clothing, footwear and headgear) and Class 41 (covering services in the area of education, training, entertainment, sporting and cultural activities) each represented 4.7% of the total.
In 2009, applicants paid on average 3,408 Swiss francs for an international registration; for 57% of registrations the fees paid were less than 3,000 Swiss francs. - WIPO
International Trademark - Top Holders and Top Applicants
With 136 international trademark applications, Novartis (Switzerland) was the largest filer in 2009 followed by Lidl (Germany), Henkel (Germany), Zhejiang Medicine Company (China), Shimano (Japan), KRKA (Slovenia), Richter Gedeon (Hungary), L’Oréal (France), BSH Bosch und Siemens (Germany), Egis Gyógyszergyár (Hungary), Pfizer (Switzerland), Janssen Pharmaceutica (Belgium), Bayer (Germany), Glaxo Group (UK), Boehringer Ingelheim (Germany), Nestlé (Switzerland), Sanofi Aventis (France), Callaway Golf Company (USA) and Siemens (Germany).
In May 2009, the number of international trademark registrations topped one million when Austrian “eco” company Grüne Erde, which specializes in natural wood, textile and cosmetic products, registered its mark.
Henkel (Germany), with a total of 2,815, holds the largest number of international trademark registrations under the Madrid system. The top twenty holders by the end of 2009 were: Henkel (Germany), Novartis (Switzerland), Janssen Pharmaceutica (Belgium), l’Oréal (France), Nestlé (Switzerland), Unilever (Netherlands), ITM Enterprises (France), BASF (Germany), Sanofi-Aventis (France), Siemens (Germany), Lidl (Germany), Bayer (Germany), Biofarma (France), Boehringer Ingelheim (Germany), Richter Gedeon (Hungary), Syngenta (Switzerland), Philips (Netherlands), Ecolab (Germany), Merck (Germany), Hofer (Austria) and Deutsche Telekom (Germany). - WIPO
In May 2009, the number of international trademark registrations topped one million when Austrian “eco” company Grüne Erde, which specializes in natural wood, textile and cosmetic products, registered its mark.
Henkel (Germany), with a total of 2,815, holds the largest number of international trademark registrations under the Madrid system. The top twenty holders by the end of 2009 were: Henkel (Germany), Novartis (Switzerland), Janssen Pharmaceutica (Belgium), l’Oréal (France), Nestlé (Switzerland), Unilever (Netherlands), ITM Enterprises (France), BASF (Germany), Sanofi-Aventis (France), Siemens (Germany), Lidl (Germany), Bayer (Germany), Biofarma (France), Boehringer Ingelheim (Germany), Richter Gedeon (Hungary), Syngenta (Switzerland), Philips (Netherlands), Ecolab (Germany), Merck (Germany), Hofer (Austria) and Deutsche Telekom (Germany). - WIPO
Global Financial Crisis Hits International Trademark Filings in 2009
International trademark filings under WIPO’s Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks (“the Madrid system”) dropped by 16% in 2009 as a result of the global economic downturn, though increases were observed among some major users of the system, notably the European Union (EU) (3.1%) and Japan (2.7%), as well as in the Republic of Korea (ROK) (+33.9%), Singapore (+20.5%), Croatia (+17.5%) and Hungary (+14.5%).
WIPO received 35,195 international applications under the 84-member Madrid system compared to 42,075 in 2008. Similarly, international trademark registrations were down 12% on 2008 with a total 35,925 international registrations in 2009. Trademark registrations reflect the introduction of new products and services to the market and are sensitive to business cycles. The comparatively smaller decrease (-1.2%) in the renewal of international trademark registrations, compared to 2008, reflects the value of established brands at a time when consumers opt for goods that are tried and trusted. In 2009, 19,234 international trademark renewals were recorded.
“International trademark filings took a hit in 2009,” said WIPO Director General Francis Gurry, “this is not surprising given the difficult financial conditions and restrained consumer demand facing companies around the world. While trademark protection is sound business practice in good times and bad, companies are more cautious about bringing new products to market when economic uncertainty is high. That said, trademarks and the brands they underpin play a key role in value creation and provide the basis for business expansion when the economy recovers.”
Mr. Gurry noted “Historically, we know that demand for intellectual property rights declines in periods of recession. These downturns are more strongly and rapidly felt in the area of trademarks which are more closely tied to market conditions. Demand for intellectual property rights, however, had reached unprecedented levels prior to the crisis and we have every reason to believe that international trademark activity will pick up as economic growth solidifies and broadens.” - WIPO
WIPO received 35,195 international applications under the 84-member Madrid system compared to 42,075 in 2008. Similarly, international trademark registrations were down 12% on 2008 with a total 35,925 international registrations in 2009. Trademark registrations reflect the introduction of new products and services to the market and are sensitive to business cycles. The comparatively smaller decrease (-1.2%) in the renewal of international trademark registrations, compared to 2008, reflects the value of established brands at a time when consumers opt for goods that are tried and trusted. In 2009, 19,234 international trademark renewals were recorded.
“International trademark filings took a hit in 2009,” said WIPO Director General Francis Gurry, “this is not surprising given the difficult financial conditions and restrained consumer demand facing companies around the world. While trademark protection is sound business practice in good times and bad, companies are more cautious about bringing new products to market when economic uncertainty is high. That said, trademarks and the brands they underpin play a key role in value creation and provide the basis for business expansion when the economy recovers.”
Mr. Gurry noted “Historically, we know that demand for intellectual property rights declines in periods of recession. These downturns are more strongly and rapidly felt in the area of trademarks which are more closely tied to market conditions. Demand for intellectual property rights, however, had reached unprecedented levels prior to the crisis and we have every reason to believe that international trademark activity will pick up as economic growth solidifies and broadens.” - WIPO
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Universal Adapter
Do you fret when you bring your electrical device to a foreign country and find that you can't connect it to the wall socket? There are various wall socket adopted by various countries. Lee Chiu Shan saw the need for a universal wall adapter to work with various wall socket. He invented a universal socket and file the patents in 35 countries around the world. The patents are marked in the product packaging.
Friday, February 12, 2010
EBay found liable in Louis Vuitton suit
EBay Inc. will pay about $316,500 to Louis Vuitton Malletier for legal costs and damages and stop using Internet search terms the luxury goods maker protested, following a ruling Thursday by the Paris District Court.
The online auction site was found liable for harming the reputation of Louis Vuitton trademarks, the company name and domain name - all held by LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton.
Ebay had been buying keywords such as "Viton," "Vitton" and "Wuiton" so that online shoppers using these misspellings into a search engine, along with anyone using the brand's correct spelling, would be directed to links promoting eBay, a Louis Vuitton spokeswoman said.
The court, which called eBay's actions "parasitic," ordered the company to stop using the keywords. The court said the practice harmed Louis Vuitton's brand.
The online auction house must pay Louis Vuitton euro200,000, or $275,000, in damages plus euro30,000, or $41,300, in legal costs. In a prepared statement, eBay said it was disappointed but noted Louis Vuitton was awarded less than the euro1.2 million, or $1.7 million, it sought. - StarBiz
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Malaysia increased PCT fillings in 2009 by 6.3%
Malaysia increased PCT fillings from 205 applications in 2008 to 218 applications in 2009, an increase of 6.3%. This is despite the global economic down turn and the drop of world PCT filling of 4.5%. The drop is due to the drop of filling of PCT in western countries: USA (-11.4%), Germany (-11.2%), UK (-3.5%).
The top applicants from developng countries identified in the PCT Report are the Republic of Korea (8,066) and China (7,946) followed by India (761), Singapore (594), Brazil (480), South Africa (389), Turkey (371), Malaysia (218), Mexico (185) and Barbados (96).
The top applicants from developng countries identified in the PCT Report are the Republic of Korea (8,066) and China (7,946) followed by India (761), Singapore (594), Brazil (480), South Africa (389), Turkey (371), Malaysia (218), Mexico (185) and Barbados (96).
Top PCT Applicant of 2009 - Panasonic
Panasonic Corporation (Japan) returned to the top spot in the list of PCT applicants, nudging Huawei Technologies, Co., Ltd. (China) into second place. Panasonic Corporation had 1,891 PCT applications published in 2009, China's Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. had 1,847, followed by Robert Bosch GMBH (Germany, 1586 applications), Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. (Netherlands, 1,295 applications) and Qualcomm Incorporated (USA, 1280 applications). Four Japanese companies, Panasonic Corporation (ranked 1st), NEC Corporation (ranked 8th), Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha (ranked 9th) and Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha (ranked 10th) featured in the list of top 10 largest filers. Ericsson (Sweeden) is ranked 6th and LG (Korea) is ranked 7th.
The University of California accounted for the largest number of applications published in the category of educational institutions. Most top-filing universities, however, experienced declines in the number of international patent filings in 2009. - WIPO
Number of PCT Applications Decline in 2009
International patent filings under WIPO's Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) fell by 4.5% in 2009 with sharper than average declines experienced by some industrialized countries and growth in a number of East Asian countries. Provisional data indicates that 155,900 international patent applications were filed in 2009 as compared to the nearly 164,000 applications filed in 2008.
"The decline in PCT filings is not as sharp as originally anticipated – last year's results bring us back to just under 2007 levels, when 159,886 international applications were filed," said WIPO Director General Francis Gurry. "Interestingly, the rate of decline in international filings is lower than that experienced in some national contexts. This is an indication of a broad recognition that it makes good business sense, whatever the economic conditions, to continue to protect commercially valuable technologies internationally."
International patent filings in a number of East Asian countries continued to enjoy positive growth in spite of the challenging global economic conditions. Japan, the second largest user of the PCT, experienced a 3.6% rate of growth with 29,827 applications; the Republic of Korea (ROK), ranked fourth largest user of the system, experienced 2.1% growth with 8,066 applications; and China became the fifth largest PCT user with a strong growth rate of 29.7%, representing some 7,946 international applications.
International patent filings experienced a sharper than average decline in a number of industrialized countries. For example, the filing rate dropped by 11.4% in the USA and by 11.2% in Germany in 2009. Declines were also experienced in the United Kingdom (-3.5%), Switzerland (-1.6%), Sweden (-11.3%), Italy (-5.8%), Canada (-11.7%), Finland (-2.2%), Australia (-7.5%) and Israel (-17.2%).
The United States of America (USA) maintained its top ranking, filing just under a third of all international applications in 2009 (45,790), followed by Japan (+3.6%, 29,827 applications), Germany (-11.2% or 16,736 applications), ROK (+2.1%, 8,066 applications), China (29.7%, 7,946 applications), France (+1.6%, 7166 applications), United Kingdom (-3.5% or 5,320 applications), the Netherlands (+3.0% or 4,471 applications), Switzerland (-1.6% or 3,688 applications) and Sweden (-11.3% or 3,667 applications). - WIPO
"The decline in PCT filings is not as sharp as originally anticipated – last year's results bring us back to just under 2007 levels, when 159,886 international applications were filed," said WIPO Director General Francis Gurry. "Interestingly, the rate of decline in international filings is lower than that experienced in some national contexts. This is an indication of a broad recognition that it makes good business sense, whatever the economic conditions, to continue to protect commercially valuable technologies internationally."
International patent filings in a number of East Asian countries continued to enjoy positive growth in spite of the challenging global economic conditions. Japan, the second largest user of the PCT, experienced a 3.6% rate of growth with 29,827 applications; the Republic of Korea (ROK), ranked fourth largest user of the system, experienced 2.1% growth with 8,066 applications; and China became the fifth largest PCT user with a strong growth rate of 29.7%, representing some 7,946 international applications.
International patent filings experienced a sharper than average decline in a number of industrialized countries. For example, the filing rate dropped by 11.4% in the USA and by 11.2% in Germany in 2009. Declines were also experienced in the United Kingdom (-3.5%), Switzerland (-1.6%), Sweden (-11.3%), Italy (-5.8%), Canada (-11.7%), Finland (-2.2%), Australia (-7.5%) and Israel (-17.2%).
The United States of America (USA) maintained its top ranking, filing just under a third of all international applications in 2009 (45,790), followed by Japan (+3.6%, 29,827 applications), Germany (-11.2% or 16,736 applications), ROK (+2.1%, 8,066 applications), China (29.7%, 7,946 applications), France (+1.6%, 7166 applications), United Kingdom (-3.5% or 5,320 applications), the Netherlands (+3.0% or 4,471 applications), Switzerland (-1.6% or 3,688 applications) and Sweden (-11.3% or 3,667 applications). - WIPO
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)