seen from Türkiye
seen from Indonesia
seen from China
seen from T1
seen from Thailand
seen from Brazil
seen from Spain
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Indonesia
seen from Singapore
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
Tour of Indian Sub-Continent "IP Rights"
👉 ✅ For more visit: https://bit.ly/2GE9tK0
Fighting to let Australian winemakers continue using the name Prosecco, the federal government has recently given a $100k grant to researchers at Monash University for exploring the legal basis to protect wines with Geographical Indications (GIs) in trade agreements.
Fighting to let Australian winemakers continue using the name Prosecco, the federal government has recently given a $100k grant to researchers at Monash University for exploring the legal basis to protect wines with Geographical Indications (GIs) in trade agreements.
Dan Tehan, the federal education minister, announced that with the grant for the Australian Research Council’s Linkage Projects, they want the university to provide recommendations on GI claims to the Australian government and industry bodies.
According to researchers at Monash University, Australia’s Prosecco exports, which worth $60 million annually, are prophesied to rise to around $500 million over the next decade. The research team includes Professor Moira Paterson, Professor Mark Davison, Dr. Caroline Henckels, and Dr. Lisa Spagnolo, from Monash University’s Faculty of Law.
A specialist in Intellectual Property Law (IP Law), Dr. Enrico Bonadio from the City University of London, has also participated as a member of the team. The legal specialists investigated the criteria, evidence, and procedure required to establish a GI of wine, as utilized in trade agreements and legal disputes.
However, the EU (European Union) wants wine producers to prohibit marketing wine labeled as Prosecco. It claimed that the term Prosecco is a GI for a sort of wine being locally made in northern Italy and isn’t considered as a grape variety.
Professor Davison said that if Prosecco is the name of a grape variety and isn’t a GI, the prohibition of its use in trademarks on Australian Prosecco would possibly contravene Article 2.1 of the Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement and Article 20 of the TRIPS Agreement. He added that they’re grateful to the Federal Government for the financial support to develop a legal framework and associated guidelines to defend GIs for wines, and to aid the Australian wine manufacturing industry in dealing with Geographical Indication Infringement claims and Geographical Indication Registration issues.
Since the early 2000s, Prosecco has been produced in Australia and used worldwide as a grape variety until 2009. But then in the same year, it was recognized as a GI under Italian Geographical Indication Law through the creation of a Denominazione di Origine Controllata across the Veneto and Friuli regions.
Later in the year 2013, the European Commission attempted to register Prosecco as a Geographical Indication in Australia but failed after the Winemakers’ Federation of Australia successfully argued that it was the name of a grape variety. For more visit: https://www.trademarkmaldives.com
Don’t forget to follow us on social media:
Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/trademarkmaldives/
Twitter – https://twitter.com/trademarkmaldiv
Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/company/trademarkmaldives/
Pinterest – https://in.pinterest.com/trademarkmaldives/
Tumblr – https://trademarkmaldives.tumblr.com/
Contact - US
Email Id: [email protected]
Website: www.trademarkmaldives.com
Smart speaker maker Sonos Inc. has recently filed a lawsuit against Google, claiming that the search giant has copied its patented home speaker technology.
Smart speaker maker Sonos Inc. has recently filed a lawsuit against Google, claiming that the search giant has copied its patented home speaker technology.
California-based Sonos is in the business of making high-end home sound systems that users can control with their voice. Although the firm is famous for its quality indoor speakers, it also makes the related accessories, like amplifiers.
Through the Patent Infringement suits filed in the Log Angeles Federal District Court and with the U.S. International Trade Commission, the company is looking for financial damages and a sales ban on Google’s speakers, smartphones, and laptops, in the US market.
Sonos claimed that the features in the Google Home smart speakers infringed upon five of its patents, including technologies that enable their speakers to communicate and synchronize with each other wirelessly. The company further claimed that the scope of Intellectual Property (IP) infringement could be much bigger, potentially beyond the search giant.
Sonos, in a statement, said that Google had been blatantly and knowingly copying its patented technology in creating and selling the audio products under the search giant’s name. It then added that despite the repeated and extensive efforts made by its team over the last few years, Google hadn’t shown any willingness to work with it on a mutually beneficial solution.
Executives at Sonos told the New York Times that they provided Google with a list of around 100 patents found to be used unlawfully. They further told that Amazon’s Echo smart speakers are also believed to be violating a similar number of patents. Nevertheless, the company opted to limit the litigation to the lawsuit it is pursuing against Google because battling against both the tech giants at once would be a risk.
Both Google and Amazon, on their part, have strongly pushed back the Sonos’ accusations. Google said that they are disappointed with Sonos’ move where the smart speaker maker brought these lawsuits rather than continuing negotiations in good faith and that they would battle against these claims and defend them vigorously. On the other side, Amazon’s spokesperson said that the Echo family devices and their multi-room music technology were developed independently by Amazon.
It is predicted that the recently launched lawsuit against Google will only complicate Sonos’ tense partnership with the search giant and Amazon. Besides, in the big picture, the lawsuit may add fuel to the upsurging pressure tech giants are having from competitors. Sonos revealed that after it started asking for patent licensing feeds, Google added new technical caveats to their partnership. However, Congressional staff members discussed having Sonos Chief Executive Officer – Patrick Spence – testify on the matter before the House antitrust subcommittee. For more visit: https://www.trademarkmaldives.com
Don’t forget to follow us on social media:
Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/trademarkmaldives/
Twitter – https://twitter.com/trademarkmaldiv
Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/company/trademarkmaldives/
Pinterest – https://in.pinterest.com/trademarkmaldives/
Tumblr – https://trademarkmaldives.tumblr.com/
Contact - US
Email Id: [email protected]
Website: www.trademarkmaldives.com
With the Patent that has recently been granted, Xiaomi appears to be in work on a foldable phone with a clamshell design similar to that of the Motorola Razr (2019).
With the Patent that has recently been granted, Xiaomi appears to be in work on a foldable phone with a clamshell design similar to that of the Motorola Razr (2019). The Patent Application shows the foldable smartphone with a clamshell design and a pop-up camera setup.
In the past also, Xiaomi teased its foldable smartphone, but that included a double-folding design different from Motorola Razr (2019).
The patent application that shows the new foldable phone with a clamshell design was filed by Xiaomi with the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) back in August 2018. However, it received approval by the concerned authority on December 6, 2019.
According to the drawings attached by Xiaomi to the patent application, the smartphone in question seems to fold entirely in half to give the traditional flip phone-like look and feel to its users. The new foldable handset also appears to carry a pop-up selfie camera with an array of sensors.
Once the smartphone is folded, a secondary screen at the front may appear to show notifications. Besides, there a notch would be visible. On the other side, the notch may turn into a back camera once the phone is unfolded.
Although back in March, Xiaomi suggested its interest in the emerging market of foldable smartphones and now obtained the patent for this new foldable phone, it hasn’t made any official announcements. Well, this is not the first time when the Beijing-based company filed and got patent for the foldable phone with such design. For instance, a patent application spotted in August this year had hinted at the Xiaomi foldable smartphone with the triple rear camera setup. The handset showed in that application could transform into a tablet when unfolded. The concept is much like that of Huawei Mate X and Samsung Galaxy Fold.
Therefore, that being said, whether Xiaomi would launch a foldable phone to answer Mate X and Galaxy Fold is still a mystery. Furthermore, it is difficult to say if the company would unveil a competitor against Motorola Razr (2019), which was though unveiled last month is yet to hit the market. Nevertheless, it is expected that Xiaomi may disclose its concrete plans in early 2020. Besides, Samsung expects foldable smartphones to cross six million shipments next year. So, it won’t be surprising to observe more brands display their new devices in 2020. But as nothing is certain – until the official announcements – we can only expect some new details bouncing on the web. For more visit: https://www.kashishipr.com/
Don’t forget to follow us on social media:
Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/kashishipr/
Twitter – https://twitter.com/kashishipr
Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/company/kashishipr/
Pinterest – https://www.pinterest.com/kashishipr/
Tumblr – https://kashishipr.tumblr.com/
Contact - US
Email Id: [email protected]
Website: www.kashishipr.com
National Board of Revenue (NBR), Bangladesh has recently enforced the Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) rules for import and export goods, to prohibit entry and outflow of products that are violating IPRs to and from the nation.
National Board of Revenue (NBR), Bangladesh has recently enforced the Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) rules for import and export goods, to prohibit entry and outflow of products that are violating IPRs to and from the nation.
Customs wing of the revenue board on 26th November 2019 issued a notification with the rules titled Intellectual Rights Enforcement (Import and Export) Rules-2019 with an immediate effect. The rules said that customs houses and land customs stations would now be able to halt or confiscate the release of goods violating Intellectual Property Rights in Bangladesh or outside, based on the application of rights holders.
According to the rules, customs commissioners will be able to destroy the confiscated products for violation of IPRs-related laws, including Patent and Design Act 1911, Copyright Act 2000, Trademarks Act 2009, and Geographical Indication of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act 2013.
The rules added that the imported products violating the IPRs would not send back to the exporting nations. The concerns that fall under the purview of the rules include production and use of products infringing the rights related to Intellectual Property Law in Bangladesh and abroad and without the consent of right holders.
As the rules stated – rights holders have to notify about import and export of goods along with the risk of violation of the IPRs to a customs commissioner at a customs house, land customs station, and other customs port. Although the commissioner can register or reject the notice within 30 days from the date of reception, the effectiveness of the registration will be valid for one year.
Upon being satisfied that the products violated the IPR laws in Bangladesh or abroad, the Commissioner will suspend the release of those products and immediately inform both – the importer and exporter about it. Simultaneously, he or she will ask the rights holders to provide the documents proving their IP rights within ten (10) days.
Note that in the case of perishable goods, the rights holders will get only three days for presenting such documents and proofs.
Md Raich Uddin Khan, NBR first secretary (customs international trade and agreement), said that the import of products that infringed IPRs was always prevented in the Customs Act, but the procedures for the same weren’t specified.
He added that the revenue board has now stipulated the procedures and engaged the IP rights holders to prevent the import and export of such goods.
He continued by saying that the enforcement of IPR laws in customs points is also crucial for Bangladesh in the epoch of post-graduation from the least developed country status expected to occur in 2024. As an LDC Bangladesh now relished waiver from the implementation of IPR provisions, he ended. For more visit: https://www.kashishipr.com/
Don’t forget to follow us on social media:
Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/kashishipr/
Twitter – https://twitter.com/kashishipr
Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/company/kashishipr/
Pinterest – https://www.pinterest.com/kashishipr/
Tumblr – https://kashishipr.tumblr.com/
Contact - US
Email Id: [email protected]
Website: www.kashishipr.com
