The law hopes to boost trade of Indonesian products in international markets

Lexology reports Indonesia’s trademark law has been amended to enhance “trademarks in line with international conventions and standards” and to boost the creative economy development as well as the trade of Indonesian products in international markets.

Thailand’s leading trademark lawyers assist in registration and enforcement of trademark and copyright in Thailand

The changes under New Trademark Law include, as reported by Lexology;

1. “Introduction of Non Traditional Marks. The New Trademark Law introduces protection to Non Traditional Marks in the form of (a) Sound Marks, (b) 3D marks and (c) Hologram Marks.
2. Simplification in the trademark application process whereby the New Trademark Law introduces minimum requirements for filing a trademark application.
3. Changes in the trademark application procedures will be implemented.
4. The New Trademark Law allows submission of a renewal application within 6 months after the end of the registration period.
5. Introduction of heavier criminal sanctions, in particular with respect to trademark infringement that will endanger human health, the environment and will cause death.
6. Provision on the protection of Geographical Indications.”

The law came into effect on November 27^th.

Read more here

Related articles:

Trump Wins Trademark Case in China

Supreme Court Reviews Law on Disparaging Trademarks

Trademark Protection in Thailand

The decade long lawsuit was over the right to use his name for real estate services

Photo by Gage Skidmore

Donald Trump has not only won the election, but also a decade long trademark dispute in China for the right to use his name for a variety of real estate services reports Wall Street Journal.

Currently, the Trump trademark is used to sell products that are not owned by Trump. Some of those products include ammunition, explosives, poker cards and condoms.

According to WSJ, of the 53 registered trademarks under the Trump name in China, only 21 are actually owned by Trump.

International Intellectual Property Lawyers in Thailand specialize in trademark registration and enforcement in Thailand

The lawsuit started when Trump’s application to register his Trump trademark in China had been rejected due to the fact that another man, Dong Wei had previously applied to register the same trademark.

The report says that since Trump was unknown to majority of the Chinese population at the time, it was a fair ruling. After several repeated attempts, Donald Trump finally won the right to a Trump trademark for his real estate business soon after he won the U.S presidential election.

Read the original article here

Related articles:

Supreme Court Reviews Law on Disparaging Trademarks

Trademark Protection in Thailand

Related video:

Case involves around rock band that want to trademark its name

West face of the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C.

The U.S Supreme Court on Thursday decided to review the federal law that bars registration of disparaging trademarks reports the Washington Post.

The justices announced that they will consider whether part of the 1946 Lanham Trademark Act violates the First Amendment in the case of a “Chinatown dance rock” band called The Slants whose registration to trademark their name was turned down by the U.S. Office of Patent and Trademark Office in 2011.

Siam Trademark Associates in Thailand specialize in registration and protection of copyright and trademarks in Thailand

According to Washington Post, “The patent office said the name was likely to disparage a significant number of Asian Americans.” However, the lead singer of the band, who had filed the registration, said that the point of the band’s name was the exact opposite: to reclaim a slur and use it “as a badge of pride.”

Read more here

Image :  West face of the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. by UpstateNYer

Two noodle companies in San Francisco are facing off over the restaurants’ names and logos, according to Inside Scoop SF.

Chubby Noodle, established in 2011 filed a trademark lawsuit against Fat Noodle, a newcomer to theSan Francisco dining scene expected to open later this year.

In the suit, Chubby Noodle claims that Fat Noodle’s name—which they point out is a combination of a synonym for “chubby” and the identical word “noodle”—plus the mirrored concept noodle bowl logo are “confusingly similar.”

Chaninat and Leeds’ business lawyers are experts on Thailand trademark registration for national and international corporate clients and private individuals. 

Chubby Noodle’s biggest beef appears to be that this confusing similarity creates unfair competition and trafficking on the brand they’ve already built, reports Inside Scoop SF.

“Fat Noodle is a completely different concept from Chubby Noodle, and will have very focused, clean, and traditional foods using the highest quality products available,” stated Fat Noodle in a response to the lawsuit. “If anything, the owners of Chubby Noodle are trying to use our good name and press to enhance their own. Their claims are without merit.”

Read the full story here.

The U.S. Patent Office has refused a trademark to “Redskins Hog Rinds” on the grounds that the name is a “derogatory slang,” reports Time.

The U.S. Patent Office said the name “ may disparage or bring into contempt or disrepute persons, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols.”

Thailand intellectual property law firm Chaninat & Leeds are comprised of Thai and western attorneys who are experts in this field

The Washington Redskins may be disappointed to hear the decision, as it may indicate that the Patent Office will also choose to revoke the trademark on the NFL team’s controversial name. In July 2014, a federal board canceled the team’s trademark registration — calling its nickname “disparaging to Native Americans.” Redskins owner Dan Snyder, has repeatedly said he would never change the name.

Read the full report here

 Two US Supreme Court decisions concerning DNA and genes have created debate.

The US Supreme Court in Maryland v. King, has held that collecting the DNA of detainees who are not convicted is constitutional.

US Police departments have been collecting a “DNA database” of arrestees, suspects, and persons of interest for probably longer than we know. Is is known that the police force witnesses to provide DNA to prove their innocence or file felony charges and then offer plea bargains to defendants in exchange for their genetic information.

Thailand Patent Lawyer

In Association for Molecular Pathology vs Myriad Genetics, the US Supreme Court debated whether genes could be patented and sat somewhat on the fence deciding: you can’t if they are naturally occurring, and the gene was only “discovered”; however an invented synthetic gene, can be patented.

And with that, we offer you this thought: if police obtain DNA from a suspect who has been treated with a patented synthetic DNA, is the police seizure of that DNA a violation of the proprietary rights of the patentee company?  In other words, can the arrestee object to the DNA test as not having authority to surrender the DNA because of non-ownership?

Related Articles: The Idea of Software Patent Protections