double_arrow
Article Archive

double_arrow Ask an Attorney

reCAPTCHA

What Our Customers Say...

Albright IP Limited
4.9
Based on 90 reviews
powered by Google
Emily Warwick
Emily Warwick
14:56 27 Jul 22
My experience with Albright IP has been flawless from start to finish. I... have never filed a patent before so I was learning everything as I went along. They have been helpful in every way possible and gone the extra mile to ensure I was kept in the loop and happy as everything was going through each step of the way. I cannot express enough how pleased I am with their service. I had the pleasure of working with Will, Abigail, and Adrian. I would recommend Albright IP to anyone looking to file a patent application.read more
Simon Mills
Simon Mills
13:22 06 Jul 22
Super helpful advice, and really friendly service. Highly recommend... Albright for IP advice and services.read more
Luke D.
Luke D.
11:25 23 May 22
Was a pleasure to work with Will and Melissa on a patent draft and filing.... Will took the time to understand both my software product and the commercial motivations behind the patent filing. They were extremely responsive to questions and clarifications throughout the process (availability isn't everything, but it certainly helps!).They were also very clear regarding fees, and set out a very helpful visual timeline and cost breakdown on the whole patent application process at the pre-sales stage. This emphasis on making sure I understood all aspects of the work, and having documentation to help with that, is something I didn't see with any of the other patent services I was talking to at the time. This clear communication continued throughout our interactions.Would recommend Albright IP to anyone looking to patent an invention. The patent they filed for me was for a software invention.read more
See All Reviews
js_loader


double_arrow
Need a Product Designer?


double_arrow
Helpful Tips

Do I have to identify the designer?
It is possible to waive the name of the designer when filing a European Community Design, but you should be sure that you have the rights to the design

Defining a line, between informative use and misleading use of a Trade Mark:

by | Jul 19, 2017

BMWThere is a line to be drawn between informative use of a Trade Mark and misleading use of a Trade Mark. The latter being preventable under the law of Trade Mark infringement.

Informative use of a Mark can be a defence to Trade Mark infringement. Section 11, Trade Marks Act 1994, states as follows:

“A … trade mark shall not entitle the proprietor to prohibit a third party from using in the course of trade:

…;

(b) indications concerning the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, the time of production of the goods or of rendering of the service, or other characteristics of the goods or service;

(c) the trade mark where it is necessary to indicate the intended purpose of a product or service, in particular as accessories or spare parts,

provided he uses them in accordance with honest practices in industrial or commercial matters.”

To this end, the recent case of BMW v Technosport London Limited [2017] EWCA Civ 779, has caught our attention. This case is an appeal from the IP Enterprise Court, in England and Wales, centering on the automotive repair and spare parts industry. Technosport is an automobile maintenance and repair company, specialising in BMW vehicles. Inter alia, Technosport included the BMW Trade Mark within their company name “Technosport BMW” on the back of a van, within a Twitter® handle and on official clothing.

The Court of Appeal had to decide upon whether these uses were:

  • Informative, stating that the business provides a service which repairs and maintains BMW vehicles.
  • Or Misleading, implying a commercial connection between the services and the Trade Mark owner.

In the judgement, it was noted that, whilst it cannot be assumed that using the BMW Trade Mark alongside or next to a trading name, such as Technosport, would lead a consumer to conclude that the business was authorised by BMW, in the case in point, since there was no separation of the BMW Trade Mark from the Technosport business name, this usage conveyed the impression of authorisation and was not informative.

Here at Albright IP, we are always keeping a careful watch out for case law developments and are well placed to advise our clients how best to secure, police and enforce their brand protection.