Intellectual Property In Singapore Case Study

1234 Words3 Pages

Intellectual Property (IP) Rights (IPR) is adequately secured in Singapore. The common refrain from shareholder to shareholder is due to the respect and the protection towards IP; hence intellectual property can be easily located in Singapore. An investor has to adhere to several generic principles in order to have an adequate management of intellectual property rights in Singapore. Firstly, it is vital to have an overall strategy to protect it. Secondly, intellectual property rights are secured differently in Singapore than in the United States. Thirdly, an investor has to register and enforced intellectual property rights for the companies under local laws in Singapore. Companies may wish to seek advice from local attorneys or IP consultants to understand more about IPR, along with the importance of protecting and having one. The U.S. Commercial Service can provide a list of local lawyers upon request.

It is crucial for companies to understand that intellectual property is basically a private right for private individuals in Singapore and hence, the US government generally cannot enforce rights to each one of them. It is each shareholder’s responsibility to register, secure, and prosecute their rights towards their intellectual property, and where relevant, owning their own counsel and advisors. While the U.S. government is prone to assist, there are insufficient benefits if the rights holders have not taken the fundamental steps necessary to securing and enforcing their IPR in a timely fashion. Furthermore, in many countries, shareholders who hinder enforcing their rights and mistook the fact that the USG can provide a political resolution to a legal problem may find their rights could have been corroded or invalidated due to ...

... middle of paper ...

...company called Colin Ng & Partners, commented that the Court of Appeal (CA) comply with the High Court that the ‘Nutello’ sign and ‘Nutella’ word mark were perceivably and decently similar but did not comprehend that both the sign and the word mark were concretively similar.
Responses from Beverly WEE, since ‘Nutella’ and ‘Nutello’ are made-up words, and without the meaning and hidden ideas; it would be hard, if not impractical to determine a concept common to the two. The CA also commented that the particularity of the registered trademark is a factor to be considered when analyzing the three aspects of similarities; which are visual, aural and conceptual.
And given the significant degree of inherent discreteness that the ‘Nutella’ word mark possessed as an invented word, the mere alteration of the last letter would not lend support to a finding of dissimilarity.

Open Document