Hong Kong: A blow to the giant – Adidas loses trademark battle against Shoe Branding Europe BVBA
Business,Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 5 minutesIntroduction On 19 June 2019, The European Union General Court (the “General Court”) dismissed the appeal application filed by Adidas and upheld the decision of European Intellectual Property Office (“EUIPO”)’s Second Board of Appeal that, among other things, Adidas’ signature mark of parallel equidistant stripes lacks the distinctiveness required for it to be qualified for […]

Why was McDonald’s “BIG MAC” trade mark revoked in Europe?
Business,Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 4 minutesIntroduction In the European Union Intellectual Property Office’s (“EUIPO”) decision in Supermac’s (Holdings) Ltd v McDonald’s International Property Company, Ltd dated 11 January 2019, the EUIPO revoked McDonald’s rights in respect of the trade mark “BIG MAC”. The reason for the decision was that McDonald’s had failed to provide sufficient evidence to the EUIPO to prove that […]

Top 10 Frequently Asked Questions answered by an Intellectual Property Lawyer
Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 6 minutesAsia Law Network sits down with Jeremiah Chew, an intellectual property and technology lawyer based in Singapore, to get his views on the top questions frequently asked about Intellectual Property. Jeremiah specializes in intellectual property, technology and competition law. He regularly advises on IP registration, licensing and transactions involving the sale and acquisition of IP […]

Intellectual Property News: Cicada Cube Pte Ltd V National University Hospital (Singapore) Pte Ltd
Business,Intellectual Property,Legal Updates

Reading Time: 8 minutesIn a decision rendered by Singapore’s Court of Appeal, the highest court in Singapore clarified the position for joint ownership in contested patents. (A) Who are the parties involved in this case? (a) Cicada Cube Pte Ltd (“Appellant”, also referred to as Cicada) Cicada is a Singapore-incorporated software engineering company and is the registered proprietor of the […]

A Guide to protect your IP in Singapore (A Patent is not always the answer!)
Business,Business Advice,Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 8 minutesIntellectual property (IP) can be an extremely valuable asset to your business – in fact, for some, it is the main asset driving their businesses. This is because owners of IP can exercise their rights to exclude competitors from using their IP or to exploit their IP commercially. While many businesses might be familiar with […]

Singapore Trade Marks – Intercontinental Exchange Holdings Loses Registration Of “BRENT” and “BRENT INDEX” Trade Marks After Successful Invalidation By Chicago Mercantile Exchange – Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. v Intercontinental Exchange Holdings, Inc. [2018] SGIPOS 20
Business,Business Advice,Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 10 minutesIn a decision rendered by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (“IPOS”), it was held that the “BRENT” and “BRENT INDEX” trade marks registered by Intercontinental Exchange Holdings, Inc. is to be declared invalid as Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. successfully pleads all grounds of invalidity in their application. (A) Who are the parties involved in […]

Intellectual Property Commentary: The Lost Beat
Business,Business Advice,Intellectual Property,Legal Everyday

Reading Time: 3 minutesBeats Electronics, LLC lost its opposition in Singapore against the registration of LG’s mark for “QuadBeat” applied for in Class 9 for various goods, including “Audio Receivers; Headphones; Earphones; Headphones with microphone function; Headsets”. In the opposition, Beats Electronics, LLC relied on nine of its registered trademarks, including the word “BEATS” for a range of […]

Singapore Trade Marks – Monster Energy Company Failed Yet Another Opposition – Monster Energy Company V NBA Properties Inc. [2018] SGIPOS 16
Business,Business Advice,Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 8 minutesIn a decision rendered by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (“IPOS”), it was held that Monster Energy Company had failed in its opposition against NBA Properties Inc. Whilst the energy drink company has spent more than US$2.2 million in marking and promotional activities in Singapore, it has also launched multiple strikes against various different […]

Lost in Translation: A Balancing Act in Southeast Asia
Business,Business Advice,Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 8 minutesBrand owners with trademarks in English or another home country language who have strong business interests in Southeast Asia often wonder whether they should also protect their brands in local languages within targeted markets. One key factor in considering whether to file trademarks in multiple languages is typically cost. That said, sometimes it is better […]

Singapore Trade Marks – United U-Li Projects Pte Ltd Succeeds on 2 out of 4 Invalidation Grounds – United U-Li Projects Pte Ltd V Tan Buck Hai [2018] SGIPOS 19
Business,Business Advice,Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 10 minutesIn a decision rendered by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (“IPOS”), it was held that United U-Li Projects Pte Ltd’s application for invalidation succeeded on two out of four grounds pleaded in their case whilst cross-invalidation by Tan Buck Hai was previously dismissed. (A) Who are the parties involved in this case? (a) United […]

The cost of litigation: Is it worth it?
Business,Business Advice,Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 4 minutesWith globalization, more and more small to medium sized companies (“SMEs”) in developing companies have proven to be worthy opponents to the larger, more established MNCs (“multi-national corporations”). How so? With the spirit of entrepreneurship, these SMEs are now producing similar goods and services at much lower costs than those offered by the MNCs. From […]

An Intellectual Property Law perspective on Open Source Software Licences
Business,Business Advice,Intellectual Property

Reading Time: 4 minutesIntroduction Open source software generally describes software with publicly available source codes, which third parties can access, modify and re-distribute. In comparison, the source codes of closed source software are not disclosed to the public or disclosed only in limited circumstances, and on strict obligations of confidentiality. By being freely available and constantly tested by […]