This document discusses several options for addressing a trademark cancellation petition filed against a registered trademark:
1. The registration could be cancelled under Section 151 of the IP Code if the registration was obtained fraudulently or contrary to the provisions of the act.
2. Consent could be sought from the prior user of the trademark, Valerio, or their rights could be purchased to strengthen the registered trademark's validity.
3. Attempting to register the similar marks "SHEESH" and "SHEESHIRT" may be denied due to confusing similarity, but past use of "SHEESH" since 2020 could provide a defense against infringement under Section 159 of the IP Code.
This document discusses several options for addressing a trademark cancellation petition filed against a registered trademark:
1. The registration could be cancelled under Section 151 of the IP Code if the registration was obtained fraudulently or contrary to the provisions of the act.
2. Consent could be sought from the prior user of the trademark, Valerio, or their rights could be purchased to strengthen the registered trademark's validity.
3. Attempting to register the similar marks "SHEESH" and "SHEESHIRT" may be denied due to confusing similarity, but past use of "SHEESH" since 2020 could provide a defense against infringement under Section 159 of the IP Code.
This document discusses several options for addressing a trademark cancellation petition filed against a registered trademark:
1. The registration could be cancelled under Section 151 of the IP Code if the registration was obtained fraudulently or contrary to the provisions of the act.
2. Consent could be sought from the prior user of the trademark, Valerio, or their rights could be purchased to strengthen the registered trademark's validity.
3. Attempting to register the similar marks "SHEESH" and "SHEESHIRT" may be denied due to confusing similarity, but past use of "SHEESH" since 2020 could provide a defense against infringement under Section 159 of the IP Code.
This document discusses several options for addressing a trademark cancellation petition filed against a registered trademark:
1. The registration could be cancelled under Section 151 of the IP Code if the registration was obtained fraudulently or contrary to the provisions of the act.
2. Consent could be sought from the prior user of the trademark, Valerio, or their rights could be purchased to strengthen the registered trademark's validity.
3. Attempting to register the similar marks "SHEESH" and "SHEESHIRT" may be denied due to confusing similarity, but past use of "SHEESH" since 2020 could provide a defense against infringement under Section 159 of the IP Code.
a. SEC 151 OF IP CODE b. IF THE REGISTRATION WAS OBTAINED FRAUDULENTLY OR CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT i. SEC 168 ii. A PERSON WHO HAS IDENTIFIED IN THE MIND OF THE PUBLIC THE GOODS HE MANUFACTURES OR DEALS IN, HIS BUSINESS OR SERVICES FROM THOSE OF OTHERS, WHETHER OR NOT A REGISTERED MARK IS EMPLOYED, HAS A PROPERTY RIGHT IN THE GOODWILL OF THE SAID GOODS, BUSINESS OR SERVICES SO IDENTIFIED, WHICH WILL BE PROTECTED IN THE SAME MANNER AS OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS 2. CONSENT FROM VALERIO a. ASK FOR CONSENT OR BUY HIS RIGHT OVER THE TRADEMARK 3. REGISTRATION OF SHEEESH AND SHEESHIRT a. WE CAN TRY BUT THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT REGISTRATION WILL BE DENIED ON THE GROUND OF CONFUSING SIMILARITY (CLASS 42 – GRAPHIC ARTS DESIGN) b. CONFUSION OF GOODS AND BUSINESS
4. DEFENSE WHEN INFRINGEMENT IS FILED
a. THE REGISTERED MARK SHALL HAVE NO EFFECT AGAINST ANY PERSON WHO, IN GF BEFORE FILING OR PRIORITY DATE (MARCH 2022) WAS USING THE MARK FOR THE PURPOSE OF HIS BUSINESS – PGAG HAS BEEN USING THE WORD SHEESH SINCE 2020 (SEC 159 IP CODE) b. IN ONE CASE, THE SC FAVORED THE FIRST REGISTRANT BY REASON OF THE FIRST TO FILE RULE BUT IT ABSOLVED THE RESPONDENT FROM BEING LIABLE FOR INFRINGEMENT BECAUSE IT WAS A USER IN GOOD FAITH (ZUNECA PHARMACEUTICALS) i. While Section 147.1141 of the IP Code provides that the owner of a registered mark shall have the exclusive right to prevent third parties' use of identical or similar marks for identical or similar goods where such use would result in a likelihood of confusion, this provision should be interpreted in harmony with Section 159.1 of the IP Code, especially the latter's proviso which allows the transfer or assignment of the mark together with the enterprise or business of the prior user in good faith or with that part of his enterprise or business in which the mark is used. The lawmakers intended for the rights of the owner of the registered mark in Section 147.1 to be subject to the rights of a prior user in good faith contemplated under Section 159.1. Essentially, therefore, Section 159.1 is an exception to the rights of the trademark owner in Section 147.1 of the IP Code.