IP expose INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY NEWS UPDATES
The IP Experts KDN: PQ/PP1505 (14079) (43)
Your Professional Guide in the Intellectual Property MazeSM
“Kopitiam” not for public use? BY CARLA MONINTJA Imagine sitting in a coffee shop and enjoying a hot cup of coffee with some light bites. Actually, it’s something a lot of us don’t have to imagine because we do it on a regular basis. This scenario is not merely a part of today’s urban lifestyle, but also something that our grandparents and parents probably used to do back in the day. For the Chinese community in Malaysia and Singapore, sitting in a coffee shop and chatting with friends and familiar faces in the community over a freshly made cup of coffee and perhaps some toast and soft-boiled eggs is almost ingrained in its culture. Of course most of these coffee shops don’t have western names that end with “café” or “coffee shop”, but use traditional Chinese names, often ending with the word “kopitiam”.
AUGUST 2012 HIGHLIGHTS pg
“Kopitiam” not for public use?
Much ado about “NIDO”
In any case, even in the absence of that word in the name, the shops would still usually be known as “kopitiam”. “Kopitiam” stems from the words “kopi” and “tiam” – “kopi” being the Malay word for “coffee” while “tiam” in the Hokkien dialect refers to “shop”. Thus, “kopitiam” became a common word for a place which sells a certain type of food and beverages. We can find hundreds of coffee shops around Malaysia and Singapore that either have the word “kopitiam” as part of their name or are colloquially known as “kopitiam”. Being such a common word in Singapore and Malaysia, would it be the same in Indonesia? To further delve into this, let’s look at the history of Indonesia. Indonesia is an archipelago country, where the center of the government is located in Java Island. In the previous regime, the development of Chinese culture in Java Island was restricted by the government. Most people of Chinese origin in Java Island did not speak Chinese, and were unfamiliar with Chinese traditions and customs, compared to other Indonesian Chinese who lived on other islands, for example in Borneo or Sumatera, where they had less limitations. Because of this, the word “kopitiam” was not a common term for coffee shops in Java Island. There were traditional Chinese coffee shops in Jakarta but finding one with “kopitiam” in their name was rare. This situation was taken advantage of by Abdul Alek Soelystio,
Is “Use of Trademark” a criterion in securing protection in South East Asia?
What do you think – Is “Singapore PGA” descriptive?
Other Updates: The Philippines accedes to the Madrid Protocol
Success story spotlight – Ms. Melissa Chen of Melissachens Sdn Bhd
INNOVATIONS DECIDE sm
who realised that the word “kopitiam” would be highly valuable for his business and filed 17 trademark applications in various classes and 36 trademarks applications of “kopitiam” variants in various classes. In total, Mr. Soelystio owned 53 registrations of trademarks where “kopitiam” was the main feature. The word “kopitiam” was consequently “monopolized” by Mr. Soelystio, reducing the possibility that the word could be used by other parties as part of their trademarks. Mr. Soelystio later filed a suit against Paimin Halim, an Indonesian businessman from Pematang Siantar, North Sumatera, and owner of the trademark “Kok Tong Kopitiam”, which was registered in classes 35 and 43. The Medan A kopitiam typically refers to an old-fashioned Chinese coffee shop with old-style furniture often made from dark brown hardwood and marble. It is this setting that gives it a homely feel, giving “kopi” lovers a cozy place Commercial Court found in favour of Mr. to have their daily dose of caffeine. Soelystio, leaving Mr. Halim to submit an appeal to the Supreme Court. Mr. Soelystio persisted and won again at this stage, as the Supreme Court upheld the earlier decision by the Medan Commercial Court. This meant that Mr. Halim would not be able to use the “Kok Tong Kopitiam” mark for his business. This situation had inspired several business owners who run coffee shops and use the word “kopitiam” as part of their business name to establish the “KOPITIAM ENTREPRENEURS SOCIETY OF INDONESIA (PPKTI)” for kopitiam owners to seek justice against Mr. Soelystio’s perceived trademark monopoly. Currently PPKTI members are preparing and compiling new evidence to cancel the “kopitiam” trademarks owned by Mr. Soelystio. We will continue to keep you updated as and when the cancellation action is filed by PPKTI. In the meantime, if you or any of your clients face similar challenges, do contact us for advice at email@example.com. P U B L I S H E R & P R I N T E R
BRUNEI IS NOW A MEMBER OF THE PCT IP Exposé is published & printed by KASS International Sdn Bhd Suite 8-7-2, Menara Mutiara Bangsar, Jalan Liku, Off Jalan Riong, Bangsar, 59100 Kuala Lumpur T (603) 2284 7872 F (603) 2284 1125 E firstname.lastname@example.org Regional Office KASS Regional IP Service Pte. Ltd. 190 Middle Road, #03-21, Fortune Centre, Singapore 188979 T (65) 6338 1323 F (65) 6334 3127 E email@example.com Indonesia Office PT. KASS Indonesia IP Services Wisma Metropolitan II, 6th Floor, Jl. Jendral Sudirman, Kav. 29 - 31 Jakarta Selatan, 12920 Indonesia
Northern Branch Suite No. 029A, Kompleks EUREKA, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Minden, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
T (62) 21 3004 8009 F (62) 21 2557 1609
T (604) 659 2806 F (603) 2283 1579
Brunei recently became the 145th country to accede to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), with Panama following shortly after. Up until the beginning of 2012, Brunei did not have an national patent system (previously needing granted patents from the UK, Singapore or Malaysia to be re-registered in the country to acquire protection), but an increased recognition that a streamlined IP system was needed to foster innovation and growth of Intellectual Property in the country resulted in the Patents Order, 2011 that entered into force on 1 January 2012. The administration for the PCT system will be carried out by the Patent Registry Office (PRO), under the Brunei Economic Development Board. The Treaty comes into effect in Brunei on 24 July 2012, which means that from that date onwards, (i) Brunei nationals and residents will be able to file international applications under the PCT and (ii) PCT applicants will have the option to enter the national phase in Brunei.
This newsletter is intended only to provide an alert service on matters of concern or interest to readers and should not be treated as a legal advice on the issues discussed. For specific queries on IP matters, please contact us for further assistance.
If you have any queries on this or need assistance with your
Note: The trademarks and images used in this newsletter belong to their respective owners. KASS does not claim any proprietary rights whatsoever; they are used solely for educational purposes.
Read more at www.wipo.int
IP matters in Brunei, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Much ado about “Nido” BY STEPHANIE MICHAEL If you thought that the main problems producers of milk products faced revolved around lactose intolerance and milk moustaches, think again. In a recent case tried in Malaysia, there was a trademark battle of dairy proportions between Hiu Kuan Hoe and nutrition giant Nestlé. It all began when Hiu Kuan Hoe applied for trademark registration of one of his cash cow brands, “LotteNidoo”. This mark was subsequently opposed to by Nestlé, on the grounds that the mark was confusingly similar to one of their trademarks, “Nido”. Both trademarks represented the same goods, being milk and milk-based products.
Cows are the most common type of large domesticated hoofed animals and are raised to provide beef, veal and leather. They also produce milk – the very foundation of dairy products like cheese, yogurt and butter.
Nestlé contended that they had used their “Nido” trademark in Malaysia since 2002, and had therefore well established this brand with Malaysian consumers. It used, in support of its arguments, the doctrine of imperfect recollection, which is essentially a principle that states that most people do not have a photographic recollection of all visual details of a trademark, but rather, remember the mark by its general impression, subject to the imperfections in their memory.
Therefore, Nestlé claimed that since their trademark “Nido” was wholly transposed into Hiu Kuan Hoe’s mark “LotteNidoo” (emphasis added), there was a possibility of consumers being deceived into associating the mark “Nido” with “LotteNidoo”. The Registrar of Trademarks was convinced by the arguments put forth by Nestlé, as was the High Court Judge, who both found the marks deceptively and confusingly similar and refused registration of Hiu Kuan Hoe’s mark. In the Court of Appeal, however, it was a different story altogether. The Court of Appeal, in its majority judgement, found that simply because there were similarities between the two marks, does not necessarily mean they are likely to deceive or cause confusion. It opined that the High Court Judge was wrong to magnify the importance of the similarity in the term “Nido” in the marks, and disregard the remaining 6 letters in the “LotteNidoo” mark. The marks were, as a whole, dissimilar. The Court of Appeal also rejected the application of the doctrine of imperfect recollection in itself, stating that to equate the mark “Nido” with “LotteNidoo” simply on the possibility of some consumers confusing these marks with one another, “would constitute stretching the doctrine to its illogical limits”. Accordingly, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal. This judgement can be seen as a practical decision in today’s brand-dense marketplace. Whilst it is undoubtedly becoming more difficult to assert trademark ownership, with globalisation and the number of businesses, products, services and competition on the rise, it may simply no longer be realistic to hold on to the archaic concept of trademark monopoly in itself. As shown in this case, trademarks which are partially similar may be allowed to coexist due to differences in other aspects. Perhaps sometimes, it’s actually worth crying over spilt milk!
Milk, which is high in essential nutrients, is sometimes regarded as the perfect food.
INNOVATIONS DECIDE sm www.kass.com.my
Is “Use of Trademark” a criterion in securing protection in South East Asia? BY GEETHA K. Although the world is becoming flat and the global economy is fast becoming borderless, trademark laws in different countries still differ to a certain extent. Some countries require a trademark to be used in their country before protection is awarded to the owner of the trademark and some countries are not so strict in their requirements for trademark protection. Where use of the mark is required, certain documents must be filed such as an affidavit of use or declaration of use, where the owner of the mark has to declare that the mark is currently used in the relevant country. Together with the documents, evidence of use of the mark is needed. As we have encountered various queries on this matter, we have compiled an easy-to-read schedule for our clients and associates to reflect which countries in South East Asia require prior use of the trademark for filing an application. You will note that there are additional remarks for the requirement in the Philippines as the law has been amended in the said country, providing us two systems to adhere to depending on the date the trademark application was filed. As a trademark registration can be cancelled in most countries if the mark is not used for a long period of time, we also touch on the possibility of a cancellation action being brought by a third party against a registered mark. As shown in the table, 8 out of the 10 South East Asian countries do not require the owner of a trademark to use their mark in the country before securing registration. However, as the marks may be vulnerable for a cancellation action, it is advisable that owners of trademarks only secure trademark protection if they foresee use of the mark in the country within 1-2 years from the date of filing of their mark. The age-old adage – better safe than sorry – is certainly true in this situation! COUNTRY
USE OF MARK REQUIRED?
10 years, renewable
10 years, renewable
10 years, renewable
10 years, renewable
10 years, renewable
10 years, renewable
10 years, renewable
CANCELLATION ACTION POSSIBLE? Yes, if not used for 3 years following registration Yes, if not used for 5 years following registration Yes, if not used for 3 years following registration Yes, if not used for 5 years following registration Yes, if not used for 3 years following registration Yes, if not used for 5 years following registration Yes, if not used for 5 years following registration
Not required for validity of mark. However, for recordal of changes in respect of the registered mark, such as ownership change, change in name/address of the trademark owner, amendment of mark or list of goods, etc., an Affidavit of Use is required.
10 years, renewable
Yes, if not used for 5 years following registration
Within one year following each 5 year period anniversary of the registration date, an Affidavit of Use (if the mark has been used in Cambodia) or an Affidavit of Non-Use, (if the mark has not been used in Cambodia) must be filed. If no Affidavit of Use/Non-Use is filed, the trademark registration will be subject to cancellation at a third party's request. There is currently no trademark law / formal system of trademark registration in Myanmar, but trademarks may be protected via:
A registered trademark cannot be cancelled on the grounds of non-use
Advisable to renew registration and republish cautionary notice once every three years.
Registration of a Declaration of Ownership of Trademark with the Office of the Registrar of Deeds in Yangon; (ii) Issue of Cautionary Notice in the local newspaper/ weekly issue journals; and (iii) Renewal of registration and re-publication of cautionary notice periodically, i.e. every three years. Trademark applications registered or filed BEFORE January 1, 1998: 20 years (due on or before the year 2018 upon the grant of renewal). The Renewed Registration has a term of 10 years from the date of issuance, renewable every 10 years thereafter.
Trademark applications filed ON or AFTER January 1, 1998: 10 years, renewable.
YES Applications registered or filed BEFORE January 1, 1998:
5th year Affidavit of Use - to be filed between the 5th and 6th year anniversaries from date of registration (ii) 10th year Affidavit of Use - to be filed between the 10th and 11th year anniversaries from date of registration; and (iii) 15th year Affidavit of Use - to be filed between the 15th and 16th year anniversaries from date of registration Applications filed ON or AFTER January 1, 1998: (i) (ii)
3rd year Declaration of Actual Use (DAU) – to be filed within 3 years from date of filing the application; and 5th year DAU – to be filed between the 5th and 6th year anniversaries from date of registration
INNOVATIONS DECIDE sm
Yes, if not used for 3 years following registration
What do you think – Is “Singapore PGA” descriptive? BY GEETHA K. & ELIZABETH KRISHNASAMY
In a recently decided case, the High Court of Singapore answered affirmatively to the question posed above. The Plaintiff, the Singapore Professional Golfers’ Association, brought an action against three Defendants, Mr. Chen, Mr. Roy Chen and Singapore Senior PGA LLP in respect to the alleged unauthorized use of the name “Singapore Senior PGA LLP” and the initials “SSPGA”. The action against the Defendants was for passing off and an injunction was sought to restrain the Defendants from using the mark “Singapore Senior PGA LLP”.
than a descriptive mark comprising common English words”. Thus, in order to prove misrepresentation in this case, he said that whether the Plaintiff’s name is descriptive must be ascertained. If it is descriptive, then whether the mark is distinctive by acquiring a secondary meaning has to be determined. The mark “Singapore PGA” was found to be descriptive of golf-related goods and services and although the Plaintiff has been around since 1973, the Judge did not find the mark to have acquired a secondary meaning.
In an action for passing off, the Plaintiff has to prove that it has goodwill, that the Defendants have misrepresented that they were connected to the Plaintiff, and that it has suffered or is likely to suffer damage as a result of misrepresentation.
The Judge held that where the mark consists of ordinary English words, small differences in the descriptive words may suffice to differentiate the marks from being similar or identical. As the Plaintiff’s mark is “Singapore PGA” and “SPGA” and the Defendants’ mark is “Singapore Senior PGA LLP” and “SSPGA”, the differences are small and sufficient enough for a differentiation among the public.
On the first limb, the Plaintiff argued that it had goodwill in relation to professional golfing activities as it has been carrying out golfing activities since 1973 via seminars, tournaments, courses and tests with media coverage. Although the Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff has no goodwill in relation to activities of senior professional golfers, the Court held that parties in a passing off action need not be in mutual competition and may be engaged in different trades. Therefore the Judge conceded that the Plaintiff had a measure of goodwill in relation to professional golfing activities. With regard to the second limb, the Judge stated that the alleged misrepresentation must be analyzed from the perspective of the actual or potential customers. He further stated (and this is where it gets interesting) that “an alleged misrepresentation is deceptive only when the mark sought to be protected is ‘fanciful’ as the law is more likely to protect a highly distinctive mark rather
A standard round of golf consists of playing 18 holes. While the majority of golf courses are 18 hole courses, some have 9 holes, and as such the course is played twice per round.
INNOVATIONS DECIDE sm www.kass.com.my
On the allegation of bad faith by the Defendants, the Plaintiff failed to show evidence of Defendants’ malice thus that allegation was not successful either. As the second limb (misrepresentation) was not found, the Court did not proceed to consider damages and the case was dismissed with costs. This dispute in Singapore emphasises what we at KASS raise to trademark owners who have descriptive marks – a descriptive mark is a weak one, despite the fact that you have it registered or have been using it for a long period of time. So when coining a new mark for your business or association, always creates a unique, meaningless mark. Remember – invented marks are STRONG marks and descriptive marks are WEAK marks.
THE PHILIPPINES ACCEDES TO THE MADRID PROTOCOL The Philippines recently became the 85th country to join the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks, better known as the Madrid Protocol. Local companies looking to enter into the global market can now look forward to reduced cost and time spent on their international trademark filing activities as they need only to file a single trademark application in one language using one currency to obtain protection in several member countries. The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) expects a higher number of trademark applications from local business owners when the Madrid Protocol enters into force and international applications under the Protocol are accepted on 25 July 2012. Director General of the Intellectual Property Office, Ricardo Blancaflor, said “Registration of trademarks by Philippine residents continues to be high at over 6,000 last year. Joining the regime can be seen as opening the door to Filipino trademark owners registering abroad."
CORRECTION TOP 20 MALAYSIAN PATENT FILERS FOR THE YEAR 2011 2011 Rank
Universiti Putra Malaysia
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
Universiti Malaysia Pahang
Telekom Malaysia Berhad
Universiti Sains Malaysia
International Islamic University Malaysia
University Teknologi Petronas
Malaysian Palm Oil Board
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
Universiti Teknologi Mara
Petroliam Nasional Berhad (PETRONAS)
Universiti Malaysia Perlis
Lembaga Getah Malaysia
Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka
Institute of Technology Petronas Sdn Bhd
Sime Darby Malaysia Berhad
This move will be advantageous for Filipino business owners seeking to increase their competitive edge by not only obtaining trademark protection locally but also in the country’s major trading partners, such as USA, China, Japan, Singapore, South Korea and Germany, which are already members of the Madrid Protocol. Business owners selling their products or services in the Philippines should extend their International Registration to the Republic as well to remain competitive and ensure adequate protection for their trademarks. Should you have any queries on this issue or on trademark matters in the Republic, do let us know as we would be happy to assist you. Read more at www.wipo.int
The MyIPO sourced table in our article entitled “And the Top 20 Patent Filers in Malaysia are…” (April issue of the KASS IP exposé) had an unfortunate error of omission. MyIPO has since provided us with a rectified list (shown above). We regret the error and apologise for any inconvenience this may have caused.
INNOVATIONS DECIDE sm
IP exposé Success story spotlight
Ms. Melissa Chen, Melissachens Sdn Bhd the decision to move on from her previous public-listed company to embark on the challenging task of developing her own line of skincare products, in collaboration with a Swiss R&D team. She observes that “today’s modern living is very stressful and to achieve balance with clear, smooth and beautiful skin is very challenging”. With her new skincare system, she hopes to realise her vision of helping others to achieve healthy and beautiful skin for a longer time. “The ultimate objective is to deliver faster, effective and better results,” she shares.
distinctive brand personality to make a difference.” Melissa started working with KASS following a recommendation by her management consultant. She had been looking for a competent company that would be able to provide good advice and take appropriate action without her having to worry about the process of getting a successful trademark in the countries where she intends to distribute her products. Today, her products are available across
“The essence of a brand is the core of a strong brand personality. And that means building a solid and sustainable brand equity. One of the key features to building sustainable brand equity is with the protection of Intellectual Property Rights. It means doing business with ease, without the fear of competition trying to imitate our core brand essence. Especially in a competitive environment where being distinctive with a unique brand personality is everything, we need to make sure that our brand belongs to us, and nobody else.” – Melissa Chen
After garnering 27 years of skincare expertise through extensive experience, research and innovation, Melissa Chen’s wealth of knowledge in the industry led to her new brainchild, melissachens high performance skincare system, a brand that was conceptualised to provide effective solutions to the most common skin concerns. Over the span of her career in skincare as a member of top management in a salon service provider, product distributor, beauty education principal and R&D team leader (with R&D teams outsourced from around the world), Melissa has treated thousands of satisfied customers. She made
In building her brand, she notes that, “Registering trademarks has definitely helped us a lot in expanding the business. It gives us the peace of mind in scaling our brand, both domestically and internationally. We know for sure that the brand equity and brand identity is strictly ours, and we can stand proud entering into any market, knowing that we own a
Asia and her goal is to develop the brand’s popularity and have a sustainable and successful business. Her advice to those who are looking to follow in her footsteps and have a go at building their own business in their respective industries is to “choose reliable outsourcing arrangements so that you can stay focused on your core competency to grow your business.”
Around the region in an IP minute
4-year Action Plan to Combat IP Violations Signed The Vietnamese Ministry of Science and Technology (MoST) revealed at a recent conference in Hanoi that the country had 4500 intellectual property rights violations over the last 5 years, amassing almost 20 billion Vietnamese dong in fines. The conference, held to review the 2006-2010 action plan on preventing and fighting IPR violations, also sealed a collaborative pact among the Ministries of Science and Technology; Information and Communications; Culture, Sports and Tourism; Finance and Public Security; Agriculture and Rural Development; and the Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuracy, to develop a corresponding action plan for the 2012-2015 period. MoST Deputy Minister, Chu Ngoc Anh stated that “with effort and collaboration of ministries, agencies and localities nationwide, the law-making activities for protecting intellectual property rights have seen significant changes, reflecting Vietnam’s strong commitment to settle the (IP) issue when joining the WTO”. Read more at http://english.vietnamnet.vn/en/
IPOPHL establishes Thousand Inventions”
In an effort to boost patent filings, instill a culture of innovation and promote the commercialization of patented inventions in the Republic, the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) introduced the Patent Protection Incentive Package (PPIP) or “Juan’s Thousand Inventions” as a cost cutting initiative that provides funds to higher education institutions to cover official fees payable to IPOPHL in relation to patent filing, prosecution and maintenance/annuities and PCT applications. Through this scheme, the first thousand patent applications (subject to eligibility) will get the benefit of a fee waiver by IPOPHL. The incentive was implemented on 22 March 2012 and will continue until 20 December 2013. Nelia F. Navarro, Provincial Office Director of the Department of Trade & Industry (DTI-Cebu), which is working together with IPOPHL on this incentive, said that “Cebu was chosen as the pilot area for this project because of its high potential for patent activity, usage of patent information, commercialization of innovation, and most importantly, because of the presence of qualified partner-institutions to host and operate these ITSOs (Innovation & Technology Support Offices) or Patent Libraries on their own
account in accordance with the terms of reference and rules prescribed by IP Philippines.” Read more at www.philstar.com, www.mb.com.ph or www.ipophil.gov.ph
Lady Gaga’s Counterfeit Gaffe An off-the-cuff Twitter remark by Lady Gaga left a black mark on the singer’s Bangkok stop of her current “The Born This Way Ball” tour. Her tweet – "I just landed in Bangkok baby! I’m ready for 50,000 screaming Thai monsters. I want to get lost in a lady market and buy fake Rolex.” – offended various parties, even fans, who did not appreciate her associating the country with fakes, going so far as to say she had tainted the country’s image (the singer has over 25 million Twitter followers). Thai authorities have in fact been stepping up measures to combat counterfeiting, through various means such as the recent raid by the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) at a hotel in Thailand’s Sukhumvit area, which resulted in the confiscation of fake luxury goods (including Louis Vuitton, Hermes and Chanel handbags, as well as Rolex and Cartier watches) worth over 10 million baht. Read more at www.bangkokpost.com
INNOVATIONS DECIDE sm www.kass.com.my
Were you at ITEX 2012?
New Addition to KASS family! Our new patent executive, Chong Chun Mun, graduated with an honours degree in Applied Physics, and has since immersed himself in the world of IP, having worked at a few boutique IP firms prior to joining KASS. He gained a wealth of experience in drafting specifications for many types of inventions, ranging from simple yet useful products to very technical inventions. He specializes in E&E engineering, mechanical engineering, IT/software, computer science, telecommunications, optical and imaging technologies, semiconductors, security systems, and automobile technology, to name a few. Adept at drawing and painting, Chun Mun enjoys art, movies, sports, reading (fiction), music and traveling in his free time.
Now in its 23rd year, the annual International Invention, Innovation and Technology Exhibition (ITEX), held from 17th - 19th May at the KL Convention Centre, was again a hive of bustling activity and creative energy with inventors and innovators sharing their visions and creations with potential investors and curious visitors at the 3-day event. As usual, KASS was there, providing on-the-spot IP rights consultation and keeping spirits up with our fun (and occasionally challenging) activities and various means to improve IP awareness. Special congratulations goes out to KASS client, Mr. Sri Skanda Rajah of STREAM Environment Sdn Bhd / Nexaldes Sdn Bhd on winning two awards (including one gold!) and Dr. Yong Weng Hoe on winning the KASS Best Invention Award for the 2nd time running!
KASS Paints the Town Pink and Orange When not hard at work, the KASS team sometimes does things like pelt each other with tiny balls of fluorescent paint. Here are scenes from our recent (and very painful) paintball session.
Our Delegates in “the District”
KASS Business Fundamentals Series 2012: Last Two Talks! We have two more talks before we wrap up our series for the year, so hurry and sign up today to learn how you can boost your business’ bottom line! Date : 22nd September Topic : How trademarks play a vital role in franchises Washington D.C., a place of stunning historical monuments, vast museums, amazing architecture, and home to U.S. presidents, was the stage for the 2012 INTA annual meeting, held from 5th - 9th May. A productive and at times hectic event, our team had a blast, meeting up with old friends and making new ones, and sharing updates on our lives and on the IP landscapes in our respective jurisdictions. Here’s a peek at some of the sights we managed to see while in D.C.!
Date : 24th November Topic : Identifying and valuing your IP assets For more information, e-mail us at email@example.com or visit www.kass.com.my
In this edition of KASS IP exposé, we look at the most indigenous, most scandalous, most musical and most free-spirited trademarks published in the past issues of our Government Gazettes. Check out which marks came out tops:
MOST INDIGENOUS Trademark No. 09014320 Goods: Clothing, footwear, headgear (Class 25) Owner: THAM YONG FA TRADING AS FA ENTERPRISE Trademark No. 2010005401 Goods: Clothings, ready-made clothings, shoes, gloves, shawls, scarves, socks, sandles, slippers, suits jackets, boots, leather clothings, sports, sweaters, general clothings for men, woman & children (Class 25) Owner: BALDAVE KAUR A/P RAM SINGH
MOST FREE-SPIRITED Trademark No. 01016268 Goods: Nets (Class 22) Owner: SUNFLOWER INDUSTRIES SDN BHD
MOST MUSICAL Trademark No. 2011014562 Goods: Cooking utensils, non-electric; frying pans; chinese cooking woks (Class 21) Owner: GOLDEN GLORY ALUMINIUM SDN BHD