Showing posts with label Guernsey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Guernsey. Show all posts

5 July 2013

Isle of Man Trade Marks

I have had some queries recently regarding trade marks in the Isle of Man, and as I made a weekend visit to the island recently, I thought some explanations on trade marks could be worthwhile.

Douglas, the capital of the Isle of Man
The Isle of Man does not have its own trade mark law or Trade Marks Registry. It is covered by a United Kingdom trade mark including designations within International Registrations.

But there is not a Trade Marks Registry
The Isle of Man Government make reference to trade marks in some guidance they provide in relation to choosing a company name.

The UK Trade Marks Act 1994 makes reference to the Isle of Man:

"This Act also extends to the Isle of Man, subject to such exceptions and modifications as Her Majesty may specify by Order in Council; and subject to any such Order references in this Act to the United Kingdom shall be construed as including the Isle of Man."

This makes the Isle of Man unique among the UK's overseas territories and Crown dependencies because the UK's legislation is applied directly - or, in other words, there is not (and there is no need for) a local trade mark law enacted by the Isle of Man Government. It is normal for the overseas territories/Crown dependencies to enact local legislation themselves, which can either provide a local registration system, or provide for automatic protection of UK registrations (as has happened in the Falkland Islands, for example).

Despite claims to being the oldest continuous parliament in the world, the Tynwald has not introduced its own trade marks law
Furthermore, I understand Orders in Council have been made to ensure European Community Trade Marks cover the Isle of Man.

It should also be mentioned that the United Kingdom's ratification of the Madrid Protocol is "in respect of the United Kingdom and the Isle of Man."

The Isle of Man is one of three Crown dependencies, the others being the Bailiwicks of Jersey and Guernsey (aka the Channel Islands). They are known as offshore financial centres and each has their own versions of the pound, e.g. the Manx pound (although British currency is also accepted). Tourism is another important part of their economies.

The Manx people are patriotic judging from the significant flying of the island's flag, although the Manx language is sparsely spoken nowadays and the local (English) accent - after years of immigration from the mainland - is not easily distinguishable from that of parts of the North West of England.

This windy island is perfect for flag flying
Culturally they are similar to mainland Brits and a popular brand in the UK is likely to be a popular brand in the Isle of Man. However, the cost of living in the Isle of Man tends to be higher than that of the UK mainland.

This store is equivalent to a UK version where every item is £1 whereas in the Isle of Man most of their prices seemed to be £1.20 
Their relationship with the EU is not exactly straightforward but freedom of goods is allowed between the Isle of Man and the European Union. A Common Purse Agreement with the UK means the Isle of Man is effectively in customs union with the rest of the EU.

In the case of local infringement of a registered trade mark then enforcement would need to be taken through the Isle of Man courts.

Although there is no Trade Marks Registry, there is a local Domain Registry. This manages .im domain names which have proved popular with providers of instant messaging software.

The Crown dependencies are culturally and economically closely linked to the United Kingdom and the fact that the Isle of Man is covered by UK trade marks is helpful to British, Manx and overseas businesses. Nevertheless, trade mark owners may wish to secure registration of a local domain name as a way of engaging with Manx consumers; it is inexpensive.

The other Crown dependencies, Jersey and Guernsey, have independent trade mark laws so do not overlook them if your business expands and spills over into the Channel Islands. (I've not covered Jersey or Guernsey here but please do not hesitate to get in touch if you have any questions regarding protecting trade marks in these jurisdictions.)

With a Scottish independence referendum scheduled for next year, there has even been speculation that Na h-Eileanan Siar (the Western Isles), Orkney and Shetland may request Crown dependency status, perhaps creating more considerations for trade mark owners across these numerous islands in north western Europe.

28 June 2012

Got a Registered Community Design, got Europe?

As my 'Got a CTM, got Europe?' blog proved popular and continues to receive regular hits - and following on from my blog on the rising importance of registered designs - it seems worthwhile to write about protecting designs throughout Europe.

As before, I will use the definition provided by Wikipedia for Europe.

We will focus on the applicant being from a member state of the Hague System (Geneva Act) e.g. an applicant from the European Union. This rules out applicants from non-Hague countries such as the United States. However, a US applicant with "a real and effective commercial or industrial establishment" or "habitual residence" in a member state could take advantage of the system. Ownership could also be through a trust company incorporated in, say, the EU and then licensed back. However, there is no provision for the recording of a license at WIPO against a Hague International Registration which could make this less desirable.

Benefits of the Hague system, contrasting to the Madrid Protocol for trade marks, are:

1. There is no need for a base registration.
2. You can designate your own country (e.g. the EU) in an application.

This means a single International application can be made to cover the home country of, say, the European Community plus Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey and Ukraine.

For the sake of argument, if we were to file one design with seven reproductions and no deferment of publication it would cost CHF 1560 (approximately €1300/$1630) in official fees.

The inclusion of the European Community would not provide protection to any further territories within Europe but outside of the European Union with the exception, as far as I understand, of the Isle of Man. My understanding extends further to it not providing protection to Gibraltar, as I have previously blogged.

Nevertheless, the Isle of Man is covered by a registration in the United Kingdom. A registration in the United Kingdom is required to provide automatic protection to Gibraltar. It also provides protection to the Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia (as I cannot see that design legislation was delegated to the Republic of Cyprus government). It is this same law, dating from when Cyprus was a British colony, that still appears to be in force to protect designs in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus ("TRNC"). The TRNC, recognised only by Turkey, has not introduced design legislation of its own.

Obtaining a Registered Design in the United Kingdom, under the same criteria as the International filing above, would cost £60 in official fees (approximately €75/$95).

Such a UK Registered Design would need to be extended to the Channel Islands. Official fees here are £120 in Jersey (approximately €150/$190) and £100 in Guernsey (approximately €125/$155) plus an official fee of £22 (approximately €28/$35) each to the UK Designs Registry for the certified copies required to substantiate the applications locally.

Kosovo introduced a new designs law in 2011 with the assistance of OHIM. With official fees of €40 (approximately $50) it is also inexpensive.

The EU designation will cover Denmark, but a Danish national design registration is required to provide protection to the remote Faroe Islands. Denmark operates a deposit system for designs meaning they are registered quickly and efficiently. The basic fee is DKK 1200 (approximately €165/$205).

This means a significant part of Europe can be covered by six simple applications at a very reasonable cost (official fees of approximately €1911/$2395).

Many businesses will consider protection for Gibraltar, the TRNC and the British bases on Cyprus, the Channel Islands and Faroe Islands as unnecessary. The estimated combined population is little over half a million with over half of this figure made up of the TRNC's population, although this figure is disputed. Omitting filings to cover these territories will see official fees drop to approximately €1340/$1680).

You may have agent charges on top of the official fees and, with the probable exception of a Hague filing, agent fees will be more expensive than those charged by the Design Offices. I can speak for my firm and know we can provide very reasonable costs for coordinating the filings.

Further afield, the only remaining European states to have design legislation are Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia. In these countries designs are more expensive due to higher official fees, agent charges and more vigorous examinations resulting in increased chances of objections. However, as the rest of the continent can be protected so inexpensively there can be room left in budgets to pursue registration in these three emerging markets that form a Customs Union.

30 May 2012

Trade Marks and Tax Havens

Having recently returned from a trip to Gibraltar, I thought I'd write a piece on tax havens and intellectual property, specifically trade marks. It'll explore some jurisdictions in western Europe and the Caribbean and won't be an exhaustive tour of all tax havens; the definition of 'tax haven' varies depending on your sources anyway. The term 'tax haven' is often applied negatively these days but my aim is not to label these places - I have visited many of them, visited one regularly on business, and even lived in another and certainly did not regard myself as a tax exile.

Gibraltar

It can be tax efficient to own intellectual property by entities based in such tax havens. It is argued that this deprives Governments of significant income that could aid development, but I won't discuss any ethical issues. I'm also not a tax expert and will not look at the best jurisdiction for tax purposes. Furthermore, I will not advise on how easy it is to incorporate and manage companies in the referred jurisdictions.

I will look at the internal trade mark systems of such tax efficient locations. Given that a home jurisdiction can impact on how protection of trade marks in other countries is obtained there are things to be considered from this perspective, and the work involved in the management of such a trade mark portfolio. Any increases in trade mark costs are likely to be easily offset by the tax savings, but a trade mark owner (specifically those responsible in-house for the trade marks) who is thinking of such an ownership model should consider their additional budget required and resources (e.g. people) required to effectively manage this.

Beginning with Gibraltar, 'the Rock' is rebranding itself as a non-tax haven. Nevertheless, taxes are not as 'invasive' here as they are in other places.

Gibraltar has an ambiguous situation with respect to trade marks. As I have blogged before, OHIM considers Community Trade Marks to cover Gibraltar. This is based on an understanding of Gibraltar's status with the EU under Article 299(4) of the Treaty of Rome. However, there do not appear to have been amendments to Gibraltar's local Trade Marks Act to reflect this. As a Common Law jurisdiction, it should enact local legislation to reflect any European or International arrangements in place and so I believe the enforceability of a CTM in Gibraltar is questionable.

The existing trade marks law provides for the re-registration of United Kingdom National registrations.

Conversely, Gibraltarian companies can own Community Trade Marks and, being a part of the European Union, there is the possibility to file Madrid Protocol applications based on such Community Trade Marks. Perhaps a word of caution - although I admit I do not have personal experience of this situation - I would anticipate some designated countries would issue Provisional Refusals/Office Actions seeking clarification of the applicant's nationality; perhaps this could even come from WIPO. However, I think these could be overcome once and they would not arise again.

This could create a bizarre and unique situation where the home mark you base your Madrid Protocol application on does not actually cover your home jurisdiction.

Remaining on the Iberian Peninsula and the Pyrenean co-principality of Andorra has a trade marks law dating from the 1990s (its first trade mark legislation). Andorra has not joined the Madrid Protocol although it is a quick registration jurisdiction and would have little trouble meeting Madrid Protocol examination deadlines. Despite being sandwiched between France and Spain, neither French or Spanish enjoy official status; Catalan is the official language. Andorra is not part of the European Union and therefore not covered by a Community Trade Mark, although it uses the Euro.

Another mountainous European principality, Liechtenstein, has more registered companies than it does citizens. The local Trade Marks Office works efficiently and Certificates are issued quickly; note that there are no provisions for trade mark oppositions in Liechtenstein. At 400 Swiss francs (around £270/$425/€335) for the initial filing fee it is not the cheapest country around particularly when the population is little over 30,000. If you need to use an agent, quite possible if your Liechtenstein company is just a tax vehicle that employs few people, then expect high agent charges in this extremely wealthy country. However, Liechtenstein is a member of the Madrid System, and its simple domestic trade mark system minimises the risk of "central attack". Liechtenstein is not a member of the European Union although it participates in the European Economic Area.

Neighbouring Switzerland is also famed for its low tax status, most notably the Canton of Zug. Swiss domestic trade mark law is robust and efficient although with many well known and sophisticated businesses and a population attractive to foreign brand owners, its Trade Marks Register is much larger than that of smaller jurisdictions. Switzerland has been at the forefront of international trade marks being an original signatory to the Madrid Agreement effective 15 July 1892. Also dating from 1892 is the 'German-Swiss agreement concerning mutual recognition of patent, design and trade mark protection' that means use of an identical German trade mark, which is registered for the same goods/services in Germany and Switzerland, counts as valid use in Switzerland (and vice-versa) provided the owner has a place of business/legal seat in either country. I am not aware that this agreement would extend to German owned Community Trade Marks, and most will know that the proudly neutral Swiss have not joined the European Union and so CTMs do not provide coverage ordinarily.

Within the EU, the world's only remaining sovereign Grand Duchy, Luxembourg follows Liechtenstein and Switzerland in boasting wealth and low taxes. Covered by a Benelux Trade Mark (covering a market of over 28 million people) or a Community Trade Mark (covering a market of over 500 million) this would be one of the more difficult of tax havens to get a domestic trade mark registered because of larger numbers of existing trade mark registrations. Luxembourg has membership of the Madrid System (in addition to the European Community being a party to the Madrid Protocol).

Maintaining a francophone connection we will move on to the Channel Islands. The French language has official status in Luxembourg and the Channel Islands, albeit most use being in administrative or ceremonial circumstances. The larger of the two Channel Islands, Jersey, is in the midsts of revamping its IP laws. For now, the trade mark law allows for the re-registration of United Kingdom National Registrations (as per Gibraltar) and for the automatic protection of Community Trade Marks. This latter situation is different to Gibraltar as it is due to legislation enacted locally in Jersey. On the contrary, whilst a Jersey company can file for a Community Trade Mark (and it would provide protection to the island), it could not base a Madrid Protocol application based on a Community Trade Mark as it not a part of the European Union.

If it doesn't confuse matters further, International Registrations designating the United Kingdom also have automatic coverage to Jersey but a Jersey company cannot file a Madrid Protocol application based on a United Kingdom National trade mark. It's easy to see why Jersey wants to introduce new IP legislation as currently it is far more straightforward for foreign applicants to protect their trade marks in Jersey than it is for local applicants to protect them at home.

Just to the north, Guernsey has already introduced a far more sophisticated trade mark system, modelled to some extent on how the UK IP Office operates, and it wants to be seen as a very forward thinking and progressive intellectual property hub; it is planning on being the first jurisdiction worldwide to introduce Image Rights registrable protection.

The trade mark system allows for direct applications (although if you have a UK trade mark or CTM in place you can use this to 'support' your Guernsey application and benefit from lower official fees). Guernsey is not a member of the European Union or the Madrid Protocol.

We will remain in the 'Atlantic Archipelago' - the term British Isles, although currently geographically correct, is controversial in Ireland (the British Lions rugby team has been the British and Irish Lions since 2001). Ireland provides similar benefits to Luxembourg in being a member of the European Union and a party to the Madrid Protocol.

Perhaps useful to North American brand owners is that Ireland is an hour closer to them than continental Europe. This might not sound much but consider 09.00 in Los Angeles is 17.00 in Dublin, but 18.00 in Paris, (Gibraltar and Luxembourg). Ireland is also natively English-speaking, although so is Gibraltar and you would be hard pressed to find a business person not fluent in English (or French or German) in multilingual Luxembourg.

Moving to sunnier climes and the Cayman Islands, where there is a need for a UK registration or CTM registration or International Registration designating the UK to form the basis of a local application. Additionally, there is no membership of the Madrid Protocol.

The Bahamas can at least boast an independent trade mark system where registration in the UK or CTM is not a prerequisite. However, a single class system that uses the archaic former British classification is in place. This means you would need to 'translate' specifications of goods into the International Classification when ready to file in most other countries, there is no provision for service marks and the Madrid Protocol is unavailable. It can also take some time to obtain registration; the Registry's indication that this can "take up to 18 months" does not match my experience that has taken around double this timeline at times.

Returning closer to home (well closer to home for me and just a 30 minute flight away) and we have the Isle of Man. The birth place of the late Bee Gees brothers and the resting place of Sir Norman Wisdom, the island also lays claim to having the oldest parliament in the world, The High Court of Tynwald.

The Isle of Man is a self-governing Crown Dependency and the United Kingdom does not normally interfere with its internal legislation. However, when it comes to trade marks, the UK Trade Marks Act 1994 covers the Isle of Man automatically (and there is no separate local registration possible). Under Section 108(2), "references in this Act to the United Kingdom shall be construed as including the Isle of Man", and a Community Trade Mark is also effective although the Isle of Man is not a part of the European Union. Furthermore, the UK Government ratified the Madrid Protocol "with respect to the United Kingdom and the Isle of Man". A Manx company can therefore take advantage of the Madrid Protocol, although as with the EU-Gibraltar nationality entitlement example above, I would not be surprised in receiving the odd Office Action from overly ardent examiners requiring ownership clarification.

As with the examples of Ireland and Luxembourg and, to a lesser extent, Switzerland above, a Manx company (by virtue of its home jurisdiction being effectively the United Kingdom for trade mark purposes) would have to contend with having to deal with more crowded Trade Mark Registers domestically.

Do not overlook a general ownership concern for companies from Gibraltar, Jersey, Guernsey, the Cayman Islands and the Isle of Man. The foreign affairs of all of these are managed by the United Kingdom and the fact they do not have diplomatic recognition themselves can create issues in some foreign countries. Some explanations and proof that Gibraltar, etc. provide reciprocity to nationals of their country may need to be filed with a foreign Trade Marks Office.

Management of trade mark portfolios in tax havens can be complicated at the best of times but when these are your home jurisdictions - and thus impacting on your global trade mark portfolio - you will see there can be some added obstacles to navigate.

I'll conclude with a table summing up various places visited in this blog.

Jurisdiction
Currency
Time Zone
Local registration
Community Trade Mark
Madrid Protocol
Andorra
Euro
CET
Yes
No
No
Bahamas
Bahamian dollar (pegged to US dollar 1:1)
EST
Yes
No
No
Cayman Islands
Cayman Islands dollar (pegged to US dollar 1:1.2)
EST
Yes but must be based on UK National or IR, or CTM Registration
No
No
Gibraltar
Pound sterling (Gibraltar pound also in circulation (same value))
CET
Yes but must be based on UK National Registration
Questionable
Yes (based on a CTM)
Guernsey
Pound sterling (Guernsey pound also in circulation (same value))
GMT
Yes
No
No
Jersey
Pound sterling (Jersey pound also in circulation (same value))
GMT (proposal to switch to CET defeated in 2008 referendum)
Yes but must be based on UK National Registration
Yes
No
Ireland
Euro
GMT
Yes
Yes
Yes (based on national trade mark or CTM)
Isle of Man
Pound sterling (Manx pound also in circulation (same value))
GMT
UK is local
Yes
Yes (based on a UK trade mark)
Liechtenstein
Swiss franc
CET
Yes
No
Yes
Luxembourg
Euro
CET
Benelux is local
Yes
Yes (based on a Benelux trade mark or CTM)
Switzerland
Swiss franc
CET
Yes
No
Yes

1 March 2012

UK Registered Designs - how far do they go?

I sometimes describe registered designs to clients as suffering from middle child syndrome when it comes to intellectual property rights stuck between big brother patents and younger sibling trade marks, with copyright being a close cousin and spoilt only child. Design law gets less attention and suffers from a lack of harmonisation worldwide; it's law being made up of bits of the other three. It's tagged on to a dominating patent regime of some countries, part of copyright and/or, as in the case of the EU, being controlled by its Trade Marks Office.

It does not always get completely disregarded and, for example, the UK is looking to improve its registered design system at the moment.

Some countries do not have design legislation and in some it is often assumed that a UK registration covers some countries automatically. Some of these assumptions come from the UK IPO website - or from private firms who advise based on this information. Therefore, I have explored how up-to-date the IPO's information is and provide my findings here. Independently, I have passed these on to the IPO so, if they agree, they can update their own website pages.

Of note is that Registered Community Designs ("RCDs") will not, except in a few cases, have the same effect as a United Kingdom Registered Design in these jurisdictions. This is a similar situation as with respect to UK Trade Marks and their Community Trade Mark counterparts.

Many of the countries that have introduced local design legislation provided for 12-month transitional periods for owners of UK Registered Designs to apply locally. I believe these periods have now concluded, where applicable.

Legislation introduced in 2002 brought design registration to Anguilla. Unfortunately, the law is is not available on-line without paying a fee.

Antigua and Barbuda now has independent design legislation.

Bermuda has a design law that allows for automatic protection of UK registrations but also allowing for purely local applications.

It is believed UK registrations will be automatically protected in the British Indian Ocean Territory.

The Falkland Islands also provide for automatic protection. Note the UK IPO's advice, "The Supreme Court of the Falkland Islands is empowered to declare that rights in a UK design have not been acquired in the Falkland Islands on any grounds for cancellation existing under UK law, including publication of the design in the Falkland Islands prior to the UK registration." This provision tends to be replicated in other jurisdictions providing automatic protection.

Fiji also provides for automatic protection. However, it is possible, and would indeed seem recommendable if this country is of commercial interest, to advertise the design rights already obtained in the UK in a Fijian newspaper.

Gambia now has its own law after implementing regulations were brought in during 2010.

Both Gibraltar and Grenada have laws providing for automatic protection.

With respect to Gibraltar, its status with the EU under Article 299(4) of the Treaty of Rome should allow for automatic protection of RCDs. However, there have not been amendments to Gibraltar's local Designs Act to reflect this and, as such, I believe it would be unwise to rely on RCDs being enforceable in Gibraltar.

Guernsey is a 'secondary' design jurisdiction and re-registers designs including those from the United Kingdom and Registered Community Designs.

Guyana also provides for automatic protection although there is a defence for infringers if they could not know of the design in Guyana which suggests if there is no use or disclosure in Guyana (e.g. in the UK only), a registered design owner would be prevented from taking action. This could be a fair defence in many of the other jurisdictions too.

UK Design legislation is extended to the Isle of Man (by the British Government not the Manx Government) to provide automatic protection. Obviously, this has been amended to reflect a Registered Community Design covering the UK. Therefore, I am confused by the IPO's statement that RCDs do not cover the Isle of Man as my interpretation is that they would.

Jersey is a re-registration jurisdiction. Only a UK National Registered Design can be registered locally; no provision is made for RCDs.

UK Registered Designs are automatically protected in Kiribati.

Malta now has independent design legislation and being part of the European Union is also protected through a RCD.

United Kingdom Designs (Protection) Act No. 181 of 1887 is not available on-line but is understood to be the local legislation providing for automatic protection of UK Registered Designs in Montserrat.

St Helena is another with the fairly standard "recognise UK Registered Designs automatically" law.

I cannot see that St Kitts and Nevis has a design law to allow for either automatic protection of UK Registered Designs or for independent local applications.

St Lucia and St Vincent and the Grenadines now allow for independent design registration and UK Registered Designs will not have effect.

I cannot see that there is any design legislation in the Seychelles at all, let alone any that would give provision to automatic protection of a UK Registered Design. However, it is possible to register copyrights.

Sierra Leone offers an unclear situation through my on-line enquiries (I've not bothered my associate in Freetown at this stage). I cannot locate a design law which would allow for automatic protection of a UK Registered Design. It is possible to designate Sierra Leone in an ARIPO design application but in the absence of any design legislation, questions should be asked of its enforceability. Sierra Leone had plans for a new IP law in late 2008 but I do not believe this came into force.

UK Registered Designs extend automatically to the Solomon Islands.

Swaziland operates its own national design registration system now.

Tanzania is made up of two separate IP jurisdictions, Tanganyika (the mainland) and the island of Zanzibar. The mainland seems to lack design legislation but provisions within its Patent Act provide for automatic protection of UK Registered Designs. When it comes to Zanzibar, local independent legislation is in place.

My interpretation of the Tuvalu Chapter 62: United Kingdom Designs Protection would be that it provides for automatic protection of UK Registered Designs but I make this statement with a disclaimer. The UK IPO seems to think a local re-registration application is necessary.

In his over six years in power, Idi Amin CBE ("Conqueror of the British Empire") obviously forgot to repeal Uganda's United Kingdom Designs Protection Act. This remains in force to this day and provides for automatic protection of UK Registered Designs.

Vanuatu's design law is in a state of limbo - and for the same reason as its trade mark counterpart i.e. an absence of implementing regulations - is not yet in operation and it is therefore not possible to file for designs at this time.

The situation with the British Virgin Islands as described by the UK IPO would appear to be the same situation as exists in Bermuda (above).

After all this, I will provide a concluding table which I must stress is based on my interpretations and the taking of some information at face value.

Jurisdiction
UK
RCD
Anguilla
No
No
Antigua and Barbuda
No
No
Bermuda
Automatic
No
British Indian Ocean Territory
Automatic
No
British Virgin Islands
Automatic
No
Cayman Islands
No
No
Falkland Islands
Automatic
No
Fiji
Automatic
No
Gambia
No
No
Gibraltar
Automatic
Automatic but
questions remain
Grenada
Automatic
No
Guernsey
Extendable
Extendable
Guyana
Automatic
No
Isle of Man
Automatic
Automatic
Jersey
Extendable
No
Kiribati
Automatic
No
Malta
No
Automatic
Montserrat
Automatic
No
St Helena
Automatic
No
St Kitts and Nevis
No
No
St Lucia
No
No
St Vincent and the Grenadines
No
No
Seychelles
No
No
Sierra Leone
No
No
Solomon Islands
Automatic
No
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
No
No
Swaziland
No
No
Tanzania (Tanganyika)
Automatic
No
Tuvalu
Automatic
No
Uganda
Automatic
No
Vanuatu
No
No
Zanzibar
No
No

Many readers will be aware of the excellent value of the RCD system - 27 countries protected for a basic official fee of €350. The UK itself also provides for cost-effective design registration with the basic official fee being only £60 (about €70). Global owners of design rights may wish to ensure they obtain protection at not only the European Community level but also at the UK level, particularly if protection is required in parts of the Americas, Africa or the Pacific. RCDs and UK Registered Designs are both obtained very quickly.

As always, any comments or questions are welcomed.