X hits on this document

85 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

27 / 31

* Coca Cola v All Fect Distributors Ltd (1999) 47 IPR 481 (RR 2005 at 938-941)

* Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Remington Products Australia Pty Ltd (2000) 48 IPR 257

* Kenman Kandy v Registrar of Trade Marks (2001) 52 IPR 137 (RR 2005 at 956-957)

Baird J, “The Registrability of Functional Shape Marks” (2002) 13 AIPJ 218  

(4)Other requirements incorporated within s17

(i)The requirement of ‘use or intended to be used’

‘use’ - s7 TMA

*Imperial Group Limited v Phillip Morris & Co Limited [1980] 1 FSR 146 (MBG 2007 at 664) (‘Nerit’)

defensive marks - s185 TMA

(ii)Trade mark must distinguish goods or services

The notion of ‘capability to distinguish’

Benefits of invented words, coined expressions, concocted shapes

The effect of s41 TMA - 3 ways that a trade mark can be ‘capable of distinguishing’:

(a)

s41(3) – trade mark is ‘inherently adapted to distinguish’

(b)

s41(5) – trade mark is to some extent ‘inherently adapted to distinguish’

(c)

s41(6) – trade mark is not ‘inherently adapted to distinguish’ but becomes so through ‘use’

Cases on ‘capability to distinguish’:

*Mark Foy’s Limited v Davies Coop & Co Limited (1956) 95 CLR 190 (MBG 2007 at 700; RR 2005 at 958-962) (‘Tub Happy’)

*Howard Auto Cultivators Limited v Webb Industries Pty Limited (1946) 72 CLR 175 (MBG 2007 at 697) (‘Rohoe’)

Clark Equipment Co v Registrar of Trade Marks (1964) 111 CLR 511 (MBG 2007 at 685; RR 2005 at 965-967) (‘Michigan’)

* Blount Inc v Registrar of Trade Marks (1998) 40 IPR 498 (RR 2005 at 968-970) (‘Oregon’)

Woolworths Ltd v BP Plc (2006) FCAFC 132 (‘Colour Green’) (HC Special Leave application dismissed) (MBG 2007 at 711)

(iii)Dealt with in course of trade

Re New York Yacht Club Application

(5)Certain ‘signs’ will not be registered – grounds for rejection of an application

Part 4 Div 2 TMA (ss39-44) sets out the grounds upon which an application will be rejected:

s39 – mark contains certain signs (ie. prescribed signs)

s40 – mark cannot be represented graphically

s41 – mark does not distinguish applicant’s goods and services

Document info
Document views85
Page views85
Page last viewedTue Dec 06 11:09:48 UTC 2016
Pages31
Paragraphs1133
Words8078

Comments