 |
|
CONTENT SYNDICATION 
|
|
CONTENT SYNDICATION
|
|
BLOGROLL OPML:
|
|
|
|
Search in IPJUR.COM
|
BLOG@IP::JURPatent Attorney Axel H Horns' Blog on Intellectual Property Law.
Thursday, September 11, 2003Another proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark.Today, the administration of the Council of the EU has published another Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark. This document conveys a compromise text as the result of recent deliberations done by the Council.
One of the major aspects of this compromise seems to be to propose to make the search report non-obligatory. The applicant has, at the time of filing a CTM application, the option to request a search report provided payment of an additional Official fee is made. However, in any case the OHIM will draw up, once the Office has accorded a date of filing, a Community search report citing those earlier Community trade marks or Community trade mark applications discovered which may be invoked under Article 8 CTMR against the registration of the Community trade mark applied for. Moreover, the Communications sent in accordance with Article 39 (6) CTMR will be maintained, i.e. upon publication of a CTM application the OHIM will inform the proprietors of any earlier CTMs or CTM applications cited in the Community search report of the publication of the Community trade mark application. Furthermore, provisions are proposed which would allow to divide CTM applications and registrations. A very helpful amendment concerns the introduction of an instrument to have a continuation of proceedings in case of a term has not been met. An applicant for or proprietor of a CTM or any other party to proceedings before the OHIM who has been unable to observe a time limit vis-à-vis the Office may, upon request, obtain the continuation of proceedings, provided that at the time the application is made the omitted act has been carried out and that a request is presented within two months following the expiry of the unobserved time limit, accompanied by payment of a fee for continuation of the proceedings. Obvious errors of the OHIM could be corrected "ex officio" according to the proposal. Another restriction would be lifted: There is no longer any restriction on the persons eligible to act as proprietors of CTMs. Any natural or legal person, including authorities established under public law, can be the proprietor of a CTM if the draft gets through. There are further amendments buried within the text, e.g. concerning insolvency proceedings, which shall not be dealt with here in detail. In total, the text seems to be a candidate for a good "bugfix release" of the CTMR.
| ||||||||||||||||
