AKUM Received injunction against Arab Music Website

April 22, 2014

Music Pirate

The District Court has accepted charges brought by AKUM (Israeli artist’s copyright collection society) and the French equivalent for whom it acts as a collection agency, that the INTERNET site Kol ElArav, had played some 20 musical creations without approval, and that AKUM could collect sue on behalf of the French Collection Society. Counter-claims that the congs were owned by an Egyptian production company or that the website had paid royalties were dismissed as unfounded.

A permanent injunction was granted, and the defendant was ordered to pay 75,000 Shekels compensation.


World IP Day Celebration in Jerusalem

April 22, 2014

World IP Day

Tomorrow, 23rd April 2014 is designated by the United Nations as World IP Day.

The Israel Patent Office is hosting an evening at the Bloomfield Science Museum in Jerusalem, where the two students who’ve won the annual IP Essay competition will receive their prizes and Nobel Laureate and self-declared candidate for Israel President, Professor Dan Shackman will be speaking on “Technology Innovation for a Blossoming World of Peace”.

There will also be a video linkup with Francis Gurry, head of WIPO.

An invitation and more details are available הזמנה לציבור יום הקניין הרוחני .

COMMENT

Does a groundbreaking discovery concerning quasi-penta-symmetry in crystals qualify one to be a national president? I note that Haim Weizman was less than happy with being booted upstairs and away from the action by Ben Gurion, and that Albert Einstein had the rare good sense to refuse the presidency (he was a great physicist, but his politics were lousy). Perhaps of more interest than the titled lecture would be a presentation by Professor Shackman as to why the Knesset members should vote for him as President.

 


Foamix Announces 5 New US Patents

April 22, 2014

foamiz

Foamix is based in Rehovot. Foamix describes itself as a clinical-stage, specialty pharmaceutical company, focused on the development, patenting and commercialization of proprietary topical foams and the first topical minocycline/doxycycline antibiotics to address unmet needs in dermatology.

They have just announced 5 new US patents in the second half of 2013, bringing the total to 25 issued US patents.

The new patents cover:

  • The composition of matter of various kinds of pharmaceutical and cosmeceutical foams;

  • Devices for dispensing them; and

  • A novel platform of the topical foam compositions that stabilize unstable drugs such as minocycline and doxycycline, which would otherwise be unstable with other topical carriers.

For more details, see here

Just before Pesach I spoke to one of their in-house patent attorneys, Tami Winitz-Yehezkel, who I worked with a decade or so ago.  We usually chat a couple of times a year, before Pesach and before Rosh haShana. She siad they’ve been busy. I now know why!

 


Post Issuance Amendment of Allowed Claims

April 20, 2014

Israel Patent No. 122910 to Genentech is directed to a stable isotonic lyophilized protein formulation.

On allowance of the Application under section 17c, Perrigo and Celltrion filed for the mark to be cancelled.

Patentee requested to amend the claims under Section 65 and 66. The Patent Office has decided that the issue of amending claims post allowance requires clarification globally, and the patent and cancellation proceeding are suspended pending a Circular on the matter from the Commissioner of Patents.

COMMENT

Post allowance amendments when a patent is undergoing a cancellation proceeding is indeed something that should be considered globally. With a pending case, it is not clear that this can happen without consideration of the specific case. The Applicant is represented by the alma mater of the commissioner, which doesn’t help things. We suspect that whatever is decided, the case will be appealed to the courts.


Aro

April 20, 2014

Tijuana 96 SL filed Israel trademark application number 235921 for Aro. Ara AG filed an Opposition Proceeding, and Tijuana abandoned the mark. Ara requested real costs of 3,245.6 Euros and provided affidavits and other evidence to support this amount. In light of the relatively little amount of work in the file, Ms Shoshani Caspi considered this too much and awarded 2000 Shekels costs.


INFINITY

April 20, 2014

Israel Trademark Application No. 232574 for “INFINITY” was filed by a Mr Amir Eyal and covers Insurance, financing, namely, portfolio asset management, investment house services, providing funds, special education funds; investment; monetary affairs; pensionary saving; all the aforesaid services, not with respect to rental, leasing purchase or use of automobiles; all included in class 36.

Due to an earlier mark, No 116478, for INFINITE, covering all goods in the same class, the mark was refused under Sections 11(9) and 29 of the Trademark Ordinance.

Eyal (through the good services of Eyal Bressler) argued that his Infinity Group, founded in 1997, was one of the six largest financial management companies in Israel according to Dun’s 100 Guide 2012. He further argued that both in appearance and phonetically, the two marks were not identical; that the consumer of the type of services offered was very discerning so there was no likelihood of confusion; that due to publicity and usage, the mark was well known, and since the issued mark was for an adjective and the requested mark was for a noun, there was no likelihood of confusion.

In her ruling, Ms Yaara Shoshani Caspi noted that applicant had failed to provide any evidence to support his claims and had not made an affidavit to support his statements.

She went on to apply the triple test.

Taking the mark in its entirety and without evidence that the suffix was sufficiently different to avoid confusion, Ms Caspi ruled that the marks were confusingly similar in appearance and sound. Since the existing mark covers class 36 in its entirety, without any evidence to the contrary, the goods may be considered as being similar.

With applicant failing to provide evidence that the consumers were too sophisticated to be confused, and with services such as pensions being available to all, she refused to accept that the target group was different.

Perhaps surprisingly, Ms Caspi ruled that the mark INFINITE is arbitrary and imaginative, since financial services are never without end, and so concluded that the original mark owner was entitled to wide protection.

She dismissed the adjective – noun argument under the ‘anything else’ clause, and thus concluded that the mark INFINITY was similar enough to INFINITE (owned by VISA) to be confusing, noted that VISA had not agreed to coexistence, and went on to reject the application.

COMMENT

I don’t think the term Infinite or infinity is so random and arbitrary. I note that Bank Mizrachi uses an infinity sign. Applicant should have provided affidavits and surveys to argue that the mark was well known and didn’t. The decision is a correct one.


April 20, 2014

Machsanei Electric

Bet Electric Elite Mehandesim LTD applied for the above trademark no. 232670 covering wholesale and retail of electric, electronic, communication home appliances and computers; all included in class 35.

Electra Consumer Goods (1951) LTD opposed the mark. Their behavior was not found to be equitable, and ruled 2000 Shekels costs against them, and Ms Shoshani Caspi gave opposer 14 days to file a statement in response to applicant’s statement.

Since Electra Consumer Goods (1951) LTD failed to respond, so Ms Shoshani Caspi allowed the mark to be registered, but noted that opposer could file cancellation proceedings.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 256 other followers