Intellectual Property & Technology Transfer Case Study

Intellectual Property & Technology Transfer - Case Study ExampleThis was in comply to chemical products for sanitary and medical example, medicines, pharmaceutical drugs and preparations cosmetics perfumes, soaps and shampoos were applied in respect of set 3. This application got on ambience in the Trade Marks Journal proper next year that is January 2007.The well reputed comp whatever that unconnected the application was Lloyds Preparations Ltd. (Lloyds). The point behind the rivalry was that it already had a registered trade cross off for ECZIDERM, registered in Class 5 and not only this but it was excessively registered for all told use in the treatment of eczema pharmaceutical preparations and substances. This enrollment had the number 1075423 and the filing date was12 June 1989 that is far older than the new application and they had made a design in the sales. In 2003 Lloyds had also registered a corresponding trade smear in France for ECZIDERM.The first and roughl y important point that arises is that a well reputed company which has been using a brand for years has the right to go against any other company who is trying to use their reach. It was directly effecting the reputation of the brand and the company. apart(predicate) from law it is a thing of common sense that no company would ever at any cost bear the name of their company being used by others in any way.The opposition was made on provision of the Trade Marks Act 1994. ... It was launched long a go. Many products that had the mark ECZIDERM were regularly being exhibited at British Association of Dermatologists annual meetings. Not only this but also they were advertised in medical publications including, Chemist and Druggist British Journal of Dermatology and General Practitioner. These were the most popular and widely read journals. If the trade mark would have been re-registered it would go against the section 3(1)(a) law.Lloyds had been spending approximately 250,000 on public ity and sponsorship of products over the last cardinal years. This was not only spent on products that had the trade mark ECZIDERM but also on the use of sales representatives. Lloyds ECZIDERM products have been upheld straight away to doctors with the help of sales representatives and also by mailing directly. So the brand or the trade mark was not to be used again in the same(p) contexts. The second objection raised by opponents was that of section 3(6) - the application was made in bad faith. The master(prenominal) reason for the rhyming trade marks was to get rapid fame of the product by using the name of other company. The evidence is that the sales of Lloyds were made in all chief rural and urban cities all around UK. Lloyds had already used registration of ECZIDERM as a trade mark in the UK. So this name had already earned considerable support and reputation, if the other rhyming product was launched, it would have got fancied fame by betrayal of people. It had earned so m uch fame that the mark ECZIDERM had also been entitled to protection beneath the Paris Convention for the quality of being well known. Hffner GmbH had probably applied for the trade mark EXIMED measuredly to take advantage of the well known repute of the previous mark