1 / 48

Антонина Стоянова Antonina Stoyanova Senior Legal Officer

The Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks : Objectives and Principles международной регистрации знаков сегодня и ее будущее развитие. Антонина Стоянова Antonina Stoyanova Senior Legal Officer International Registries of Madrid and Lisbon WIPO

naida
Download Presentation

Антонина Стоянова Antonina Stoyanova Senior Legal Officer

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks : Objectives and Principles международной регистрации знаков сегодня и ее будущее развитие Антонина СтояноваAntonina Stoyanova Senior Legal Officer International Registries of Madrid and Lisbon WIPO сотрудник Международного Реестра товарных знаков

  2. More than 100 years of Experience … 1989 Russ Suchard et Cie Madrid Protocol 1970 PCT 1967 WIPO Convention 1960 BIRPI moves to Geneva 1925 Hague Agreement 1893 BIRPI 1891 1886 Madrid Agreement Berne Convention 1883 Paris Convention NOT Printed

  3. IRN 158 574 … More than a Million Trademarks Worldwide NOT Printed • This Longine trademark is the oldest international trademark still in effect. • Originally registered in Switzerland in 1889, then internationally in 1893.

  4. Marking a Million • The registration of the millionth mark by Austrian eco-company IRN 1 000 000 NOT Printed

  5. Objectives andConcept of the Madrid System

  6. Objectives • A simple, low-cost and effective • system facilitating trademark protection in export markets through: • one central application and registration procedure ensuring effects in a number of territories bound by the system • one central procedure to maintain and manage an international registration with effects in all territories concerned

  7. GoingGlobal • Accelerated geographic expansion • more attractive as more trading partners join • increased flexibility in targeting markets with respect to particular goods and services • Increased use • by existing as well as new Contracting Parties (developing as well as developed) • by small, medium and large enterprises

  8. Comparison between national and international route National (direct) routevs.Madrid (inter.) route Different proceduresOnly one procedure Different languagesOne language 1 of 3 (E/F/S) Different fees in localOne set of fees in CH currencies (exchange–rate implications) Management of IRs: Recording of changes One procedure in respect of all countries (in each separate country a different procedure) Representative required Representative required only in case of from outset refusal

  9. Legal Framework and Geographical Scope

  10. Legal Framework • Madrid Agreement (1891)latest revised in 1979 • Madrid Protocol (1989) • latest revised in 2007 • Common Regulationsas in force from September 1, 2009 • Administrative Instructionsas in force from January 1, 2008 • Law and Regulations of each Contracting Party • See at http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/legal_texts/ • http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/members/ipoffices_info.html

  11. 2 Agreement only29 Protocol only (including EU)54 Agreement and Protocol 85 Members Madrid Union

  12. Geographical Scope II 81 MEMBERS PARTY TO THE PROTOCOL Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Belgium, Bhutan, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Estonia, Egypt, European Union, Finland, France, Georgia, Ghana, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan,Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro,Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands (+Netherlands Antilles), Norway, Oman, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, San Tome and Principe, Serbia,Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Zambia underlined = Agreement also 2 MEMBERS PARTY TO THE AGREEMENT ONLY Algeria and Tajikistan www.wipo.int/madrid/en/members/ipoffices_info.html

  13. The Madrid System in Trademarks World • Some 965,000 trademark applications were filed worldwide by non-residents in 2007 • of which • Some 370,000 are through the designation under the Madrid system (38%)

  14. International Registrations in Forceas of December 31, 2009 • 515,562 the total number of registrations in force, equivalent to • over 5.6 million active national/regional registrations, belonging to • 169,939 trademark holders

  15. Main Principles • An additional route • An optional route • A closed system • One registration - a bundle of rights

  16. Basic Features of the Madrid Protocol

  17. Basic Features of the Madrid Protocol • Filing conditions: who, what, where to file? • Examination and registration procedure • International Bureau - formal examination and international registration • Designated Contracting Party - Substantive examination to confirm or reject the effects of IR • Centralized management of IR : subsequent territorial extension, modifications, renewal etc.

  18. Filing Preconditions Applicant having an attachment to a Contracting Party Real and effective industrial or commercial establishment Domicile, Nationality (Articles 2 & 3, Paris Convention) Having the mark registered or deposited for registration in the same territory( basic mark or application for a mark) same person, same mark, same goods and services (or less)

  19. Filing Conditions – Where? An international application must be presented to the International Bureau through the IP office of the CP with which the applicant has the attachment (establishment, domicile or nationality) - Filing through the Office of Origin of the applicant (Indirect filing)

  20. Filing Conditions One form -Official (http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/forms/) One language (English, French or Spanish) One standard of goods and services classification (Nice Classification) One set of fees in Swiss Currency: online cost estimate (at http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/fees/calculator.jsp)

  21. 222 International Application • Content: • Office • Applicant • Entitlement • Basis • Mark • Goods & services • Designations • Fees • Other indications

  22. Protection = effect ofa national registration International Filing and Registration Flow Certify and forward the application to the IB OFFICE OF ORIGIN APPLICANT Entitlement Basic mark Form EN Formal examination; registration; publication (Gazette); Certificate; Notification to all designated CPs INTERNATIONALBUREAU Substantive examination under domestic law, within 12/18 months OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE Refusal

  23. Latest Developments andStatistics

  24. Enhancement of ROMARIN • As from January 1, 2009 • Notifications of provisional refusals, their confirmation or withrawal, invalidations or statements of grant of protection, received by IB are available in Romarin

  25. General Profile 2009

  26. Top Filer CPs in 2010(until September) as compared to 2009

  27. European Union 3,710 3.1% Japan 1,312 2.7% Republic of Korea 249 33.9% Hungary 245 14.5% Croatia 235 17.5% Singapore 200 20.5% Some significant filing increases in 2009(as compared to 2008) Application growth

  28. Top Designated CPs for 2010( but only until September )

  29. Where is the Czech Republic • IRs by Office of Origin, steady growth as from 2005-547,559,541, 607, 397 for 2009. • At present 2010-190 IRs • The CzR is at the 17 th palce in number of applications for 2009 • With share of 1.1%, with a significant minus growth of -34.6% • Individual Designations of Cz in IRs- slow decrease as from 2005-5183, 4554, 4020, 3524, 2819 for 2009 • At present 2010- 1448 • CzR is at the 34 th place, with share of 1.00% and -21.6% growth

  30. Most Popular classes of goods and services in IRs in 2009

  31. Top 50 Holders in 2009 Novartis (CH), Lidl Stiftung (DE); Henkel (DE); Zhejiang Medicine Company (CN), Shimano (JP), KRKA (SL), Richter Gedeon (HR), L’Oréal (FR), BSH Bosh und Siemens (DE), Egis Gyógyszergyár (HU), Pfizer (CH), Janssen Pharmaceutical (BE), Bayer (DE), Glaxo Group (UK), Boehringer Ingelheim (DE), Nestlé (CH), Sanofi Aventis (FR), Callaway Golf Company (US), Siemens (DE), Deutsche Telekom (DE), Biofarma (DE), Beiersdorf (DE), Tui AG (DE), Syngenta Participations (CH), DSM IP Assets (NL), ITM Entreprises (FR), Kabushiki Kaisha (JP), ICN (PL), Spar (AT), Gazprom(RU), Kaufland (DE), Daiichi Sankyo (JP), Audi AG (DE), Unilever (NL), GDF Suez (FR), Hofer (AT), ZF (DE), BASF (DE), Novo Nordisk (DK), Brillux GmbH (DE), Beijing Wanjindao (CN), Pivovarna Union (SL), Christian Dior Couture (FR), Ningbo Far East (CN), Microsoft Corporation (US), Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber (CN), Mibe GmbH (DE), Strauss Adriatic (RS), Merck (DE), Ecom Holdings (AU)

  32. International Registrations and Subsequent Designations -1996 - 2009

  33. Signs of Recovery • 2009- Madrid System IRs declined by 12.3 %, representing the first decrease since 2002-2003 and being primarily due to a fall in applications from residents of France, Germany and USA. • Beyond 2009 there are grounds for optimism as international trademarks registrations under MS have returned to growth • The experience of the first six months of 2010 points to a positive rebound in Madrid IRs

  34. Electronic communication and Information Tools

  35. Electronic Communications:Offices  IB

  36. Electronic Communications: Holders and Reps.  IB

  37. Electronic Communications: Holders and Reps.  IB

  38. Electronic Communications:IB Holders and Reps. Notifications

  39. Information Products & Services provided by IB • Various legal texts, guide and information notices (WIPO LexSearch, new tool, as from Sept2010, http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/),specific Madrid legal texts, http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/legal_texts/ • WIPO Gazette of International Marks • Fee Calculator: on-line costing service • Madrid Simulator: on-line filing guide tool • ROMARIN: on-line search database • Country specific legal information on national procedures in relation to Madrid Protocol free access at http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/

  40. Information ConcerningProcedures Before IP Offices The legal framework of Madrid system includes the national Trademark Legislations of all Madrid Member states. In order to improve information concerning this issue, WIPO provides specific information in regard to procedures before IPOffices, • 76 country profiles to date hp://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/members/ipoffices_info.html

  41. International Application Simulator • The simulator is designed to respond specifically to the individual need in using the Madrid System when seeking protection of your mark abroad. At the end of the simulation, it will also help you estimate the cost of registering your mark through the Madrid System. http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/madrid_simulator/

  42. E- Payment • Payment of fees with regard to IAs and IRs, as notified by IB in irregularity letters at:online services :http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/services/ • Made through a credit card or through a current account with WIPO • Any queries regarding e-payment at: e-payment@wipo.int

  43. Recent Accessions • The most recent Members of MP are • Madagascar(P): January 28, 2008 • Ghana (P): September 16, 2008 • Egypt (P): September 3, 2009 • Liberia(P): December 11,2009 • Sudan(P): February, 16, 2010 • Kazakhstan (P): December 9, 2010

  44. Prospective Accessions • Most promising: • Mexico, Tajikistan(A), Algeria (A) • Under consideration: • Canada, Indonesia, New Zealand, Thailand, South Africa, Brazil, India

  45. Conclusion: the Madrid System • A simple, low-cost and effective international TM application and registration system (1891 - 2010) • Two treaties: the Madrid Protocol (1989) and • the Madrid Agreement (1891) • Benefits trademark holders in 85 members • Signifiant Instrument to facilitate global trade

  46. Future evolvements • Simplification of MS • After the repeal of the safegurad clause and the predominant position of the P more that 90% of the annual IRs are exclusively governed by the MP • If and when the two remaining Agreement only member states accede to Protocol, the Agreement will cease to exist( or will be frozen) • That will make the system simpler, even more efficient and more attractive

  47. The Madrid System Simplifies TM Registration & Management worldwide Empowers Businesses in export markets • See what our users say about the Madrid system at: http://www.wipo.int/multimedia/en/madrid/madrid-videos/index.html

  48. Thank youAntonina.Stoyanova@wipo.int

More Related