Trade Mark Protection Endorsed For Apartment Manager

Can a business obtain the registration of a trade mark for services where the mark concerned is also the name of the building from which the services are supplied?  This was the central issue for determination in a recent Federal Court decision involving the well-known Q1 building on the Gold Coast.

On 19 July 2012, Justice Reeves decided that this was no reason to prevent Mantra from obtaining a trade mark registration for “Q1” for the hotel and real estate services provided by it from the Q1 building.

read more...

Reveal Day

Last night, ICANN posted all applications for the new global Top Level Domains (gTLD) and who has applied for them.  Amazon made over 70 applications for words in English and Google made approximately 100 applications.  Interestingly,  Facebook did not make any applications.  In total, approximately 1900 applications were made.

You can read more about Reveal Day in our alert here.

 

read more...
Subjects: Technology | Trade marks

Partner:

Breaking News: High Court confirms iiNet is not liable for peer-to-peer file sharing

Today, the High Court held that iiNet was not liable for copyright infringement by its users or subscribers when they downloaded unauthorised copies of cinematographic films, in the case of Roadshow Films Pty Ltd & Others v iiNet Limited.  This decision affirms the results of the decisions of the Federal Court and Full Federal Court.

Stay tuned for further updates on the reasons for the decision. 

read more...
Subjects: Copyright

Partner:

Mambo minus “M” equals 100% Mabo (Mambo – M = 100% Mabo)

Last week, the clothing company, Mambo, agreed to cease opposition proceedings against Malcolm Mabo (the son of Eddie Mabo of Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1).

Malcolm Mabo, a Palm Island artist, is planning to start a clothing company to promote authentic indigenous art and employment, under the brand, “Mabo”, and sought to trade mark the name.  When Mambo found out, it instituted opposition proceedings, contending that the brands would be “deceptively similar”. 

read more...
Subjects: Trade marks

Partner: