In today’s society, it is not difficult to fathom why an organization may place trademarks upon their designs or expressions. Such safety measures allow a company to ensure that others do not replicate their personality profile for commercial purposes, sanctioning for the delineation between organizations (Wensley and Caraway, 2014). A trial between Salam Toronto Publications v. Salam Toronto Inc. exemplified the lack of discrepancy between two companies and was investigated to detect trademark infringement. This lawsuit took place in Toronto, Ontario on Sept. 29, 2008, and lasted until Jan. 9th, 2009 (Salam Toronto Publications v. Salam Toronto Inc., 2009). The plaintiff, Salam Toronto Publications, administered by Mohsen Seyed Taghavi, was an Urdu/Farsi newspaper that had been operating since October 2000, printing issues pertaining to the Iranian population (Salam Toronto Publications v. Salam Toronto Inc., 2009). Mr. Taghavi indicated to the Court of Law that Salam Toronto Publications was registered on January 5th 2001 and "Salam Toronto” was trademarked, sanctioning for prima facie evidence of ownership (Salam Toronto Publications v. Salam Toronto Inc., 2009)(Wensley and Caraway, 2014). The plaintiff issued a trademark infringement following the depreciation of goodwill and breach of sections 7(b), 19, 20, and 22 of Canada's Trademark Act, and passing off (Salam Toronto Publications v. Salam Toronto Inc., 2009). The utmost deliberated section of the Trademark Act was section 20, which detailed that a trademark was violated only if it was used in “association with a confusing trade name” (Salam Toronto Publications v. Salam Toronto Inc., 2009). It was reported within the litigation that the defendant, Salam Toronto Immigratio...
... middle of paper ...
...not considered violated (Salam Toronto Publications v. Salam Toronto Inc., 2009). Moreover, trademark dilution was disparaged since “Salam Toronto” was considered a non-famous mark and involved little likelihood of confusion if services were in unrelated markets, which is what this particular lawsuit encompassed (Wensley and Caraway, 2014)("Trademark dilution"). Upon examination of all of this, the court decreed that there was no infringement and the litigation was dismissed.
Works Cited
Salam Toronto Publications v. Salam Toronto Inc., 2009 FC 24 (CanLII), retrieved on 02.15.14
"Trademark dilution." Wikipedia. N.p., 2 Jan 2014. Web. 15 Feb 2014.
.
Wensley, Anthony. Caraway, Brett. “Trademark Lecture Slides” CCT206H5S.
University of Toronto Mississauga. 6, Feb. 2014. Lecture PowerPoint.
v. VIP Prods., LLC 666 F. Supp. 2d 974 (Mo., 2008) Anheuser-Busch makes a distinction between confusing and non-confusing parodies, the latter being protected as a parody. The important factors in the case were that the price point of the products was the same, they were directly competing goods and the survey showed that there was a level of confusion (30.3% were confused), in addition, consideration was placed on irreparable harm caused by the defendants use of the mark, the priority lay with the first to register the trademark, lastly the District Court considered public interest, i.e. whether the public was deceived. Similarly in Starbucks Corp v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee Inc., 588 F3d 97 (2d Cir. 2007) the court distinguished Louis Vuitton S.A. v Haute Diggty Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252 (4th Cir. 2007) by holding that if (as in the Louis Vuitton case), the mark is used in non-competing goods, the defendant conveyed that it was not the source of the plaintiffs product and if the actual use of the mark does not impair the distinctiveness of the plaintiff’s mark there may be an argument in favor of the defendant, however, if the defendant’s humor is not conveyed to the public, and does not increase the public identification of the plaintiff’s mark with its mark it will fail to establish
Blair, Annice. Law in Action: Understanding Canadian Law. Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Education Canada, 2003. Print.
Sweeney, B, O'Reilly, J & Coleman, A 2013, Law in Commerce, 5th edition, Lexis Nexis, Australia.
Rodriguez V. Attorney General Of Canada." Issues In Law & Medicine 9.4 (1994): 389. Academic Search Complete. Web. 16 Nov. 2013.
Public law : Cases, materials, and commentary In Forcese C. (Ed.), . Toronto: Toronto : Emond Montgomery Publications, 2006.
I don’t believe that the U.S.-Canadian magazine dispute was genuinely motivated to protect Canadian culture. From reading the article in Globalization 101 it appears that the Canadian government saw magazines coming in from the United States as an opportunity to add a new tax to a product that was entering their market space. Although this was changed shortly after the dispute was settled by the WTO (1997). It appears that the Canadian government moved more towards wanting a ‘cultural uniqueness’ after the United States threatened to impose retaliatory measures against Canadian steel, textiles and apparel, wood products and plastics.
Case introduction: A 19 year-old gentlemen, SS, presented to station 20N through the emergency department, following what was described by friends and family as “bizarre behavior.” SS had recently begun college at a local liberal arts school. He had done well during the first semester, but began to struggle academically during the second semester. Family attributed the decline in academic success to an increase in class size, which made SS uncomfortable. Several weeks prior to hospital admission, SS became increasingly isolated, spending the majority of his time in the dorm room and less time in class. Friends and roommates reported that SS was exhibiting bizarre behavior, often confiding in friends that he was being “spied on” by others and that people around him could “read his thoughts.” SS also endorsed a strange delusion in which those around him would blink simultaneously as a form of communication. All of the aforementioned events became overly distressing to SS and his family, so they sought medical help. SS had a limited psychiatric history for which he had seen a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist had put him on an anti-psychotic medication some months prior, but SS self-discontinued the medication after just a several week trial. As a result of the above, and a lack of explanation regarding the past psychiatric referral, the events were described as “first-episode psychosis.” Discussion regarding the diagnostic work-up followed.
Anand, A. (2011). Combating terrorist financing: Is Canada’s legal regime effective? University of Toronto Law Journal, 61(1), 59-71. Retrieved from http://library.mtroyal.ca:2078/journals/university_of_toronto_law_journal/v061/61.1.anand.html
In the absence of registered trade mark rights, case law suggests as a general principle, that mere similarity of goods is not enough for an actionable wrong to occur. Passing off derives from the common law action deceit which is the civil action for fraudulent misrepresentation. Passing off is a non-statutory cause of action that has developed over the years through case law and has changed considerably overtime. Passing off came into existence long before trademarks became registerable and has always been available at common law for marks refused registration, not registered or ineligible for
1. To what extent do you think the U.S.-Canadian magazine dispute was motivated by genuine
At the most recent strategy session, the CEO of Pegasus, Tom Oswald, and division managers of the Wireless Division decided that they would like to expand into China. Through the team’s initial research, it indicates that China is likely to develop into a profitable market for wireless. In conjunction, the government has made spending on wireless a priority as an added incentive to pursue this venture. The extreme expenses of burying communication cables make wireless the most optimum solution. Additionally, copper wires are used for the buried cables, which tends to a lucrative business to steal the copper cables and sell it in the black market.
In brief, Canada’s history with trademarks can be traced back to pre-confederation in 1860, whereby the legislative council and Assembly of Canada adopted An Act Respecting Trademarks. Thereafter, the Trade-marks Act which is still in use today was enacted in 1953. Since that time, however, only minor changes have occurred within this Act. For instance, in 2005, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) wanted to modernize the Trade-marks Act. This included, but was not limited to changes to the regulation of non-traditional trademarks. This very brief historical overview shows Canada’s reluctance to make radical changes to the area of trademark law. This in turn creates a disadvantage for potential trade mark owners in Canada, as the law is not as comprehensive to cover areas such as non-traditional signs. Markets are constantly changing and with the innovations in technology, companies need these new and innovative ways to distinguish themselves in new ways to stay current in the marketplace and attract customers. Therefore with Canada’s stagnation in making changes in the law to in recognition of globalization and technological innovations, it puts Canadian companies at a disadvantage. However, with the passing of Bill C-35 it can be argued that slowly but surely, Canada will be on par with other jurisdictions around the world. This will shown by analyzing the current trademark law in the EU and US.
In China, the legislative framework for the registration for certification mark is completely different from the framework present in India. Moreover the new PRC trademark law which has come into effect from 1st May 2014 bought substantial changes to the current trademark regime in place in China. The protection afforded to well known trademark has been increased as Article 14 of the new Act provides that determination of well known trademark would be undertaken in case of infringement of well known trademark. However procedural norms regarding opposition proceedings have been drastically altered and now if the opposition fails at the Trademark Office level, which is the first level of review for an opposition, the mark would immediately proceed to registration. This is in contrast to the current state of law which allows the opponent in such a situation to appeal to the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board and further apply for judicial review at two levels of court. In addi...
Upon registering a trademark, the mark is in fact established. This process is essential in granting the owner the exclusive right to using the trademark, i.e. the right to prevent all third parties who do not have the owner’s consent in using the trademark within the course of trade. Establishing and registering trademarks has several purposes. Firstly, it helps consumers in differentiating between inferior, counterfeit goods and services that appear to originate from the original merchant. This prevents them from deception. Secondly, trademarks protect the owner’s investment in reputation and therefore protect the businesses with which they are associated with (________________________). Once they are registered, trademarks are valid for ten years from date of applic...
When developing the name of the company, there are many requirements to be met by entrepreneurs to achieve success with a trademark. Names like Coca-Cola, Google, Snickers, Nike, Yahoo, and many other worldwide known brands may serve an example for the future merchandisers that the coinage is the core ele...