Last week Indonesia deposited its instrument of accession to the Madrid Protocol and brought the number of contracting parties into triple figures.
It follows hot on the heels of Thailand, which will be available for designation in International applications in less than a month.
The ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries are committed to joining the Madrid Protocol and now eight out of the 10 countries are on board. Brunei, Cambodia and Laos joined up in the last two years leaving Malaysia and Myanmar as the only ASEAN countries not a part of Madrid. Malaysia has undergone consultations and appears to be in the process of taking steps to ready itself to accede.
In Myanmar, the IP world is still waiting for the country to adopt a formal trademark law. Currently, a deposit registration system with a Cautionary Notice publication supports Common Law rights in trademarks. After years of waiting, there are now indications that Myanmar will be opening a new IP Office to operate a formal trademark law. It appears the new law may be a stepping stone towards Madrid membership or, in other words, first of all there will only be a national system for registration but presumably once the Office is up to speed it can look to accede to the Madrid Protocol and have International Registrations designate Myanmar.
There are some concerns on how well Indonesia may manage meeting the strict timelines for examining International applications. It has made a declaration under Article 5(2)(b) of the Protocol to extend the refusal period to 18 months but it could be they still struggle to meet this given an expected increase of applications now it will be easier for foreign parties to simply tick a box to file in Indonesia in an International application. Could this therefore see a backlog in the examination of national applications?
It will be interesting to see how much Indonesian businesses use the Madrid system. Domestic applicants make a lot of trademark applications in their home market. Now they will have easier access to designate most of their ASEAN partners in an International application, Australia, just to the south may also be an attractive market, as well as the powerhouse economies of Asia, Europe and the United States.
Showing posts with label Malaysia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Malaysia. Show all posts
9 October 2017
9 August 2013
Closed Trade Marks Registers still existing
There are a handful of former Trade Marks Registers that have since merged into other Registers but for many intents and purposes are still in existence.
Having an unhealthy collection of modern atlases as a child (in the days before the internet), I was aghast when I began working in this field and first came across a trade mark in Sabah. What? Where? I thought I'd heard of every country...
Sabah, formerly the British Crown Colony of North Borneo, had its own Trade Marks Registry operating from the capital Jesselton (now known as Kota Kinabalu). The same is true of neighbouring Sarawak.
Sabah and Sarawak joined with Malaya to form Malaysia. The region of Malaya, with connotations of its British colonial past, is now more properly referred to as Peninsular Malaysia.
The separate Trade Marks Registers remained in place although no new applications were possible; filing a Malaysian application was now required. For a stage, I understand it was possible to merge identical registrations in Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak into a single Malaysian registration but this is no longer possible. This is why there are still registrations in Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak being renewed (and assigned, etc.). However, they are all maintained and renewed at the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia with headquarters in Kuala Lumpur but branch offices in Sabah and Sarawak.
These registrations provide protection in their relevant geographic area and there is a possibility that the owners of identical or highly similar marks may not be the same in different parts of Malaysia.
It is perhaps worth noting that Malaysia now contains three federal territories. Two of these are in Peninsula Malaysia (Malaya) but the other, the wealthy island of Labuan, was ceded by Sabah to the federal Malaysian government in 1984. As such it is possible that an owner of identical Malaya/Sabah/Sarawak registrations would not have coverage for the whole modern day country of Malaysia. (In this event it would, of course, be possible to make a new application in Malaysia.)
Of more notorious note are the three trade mark jurisdictions derived from former bantustans in South Africa. Four of these achieved independence, albeit unrecognised by the international community, the so-called "TBVC States" of Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei. The latter introduced intellectual property legislation in respect of copyright only so it was just the first three that had Trade Marks Registers.
Following the end of apartheid, these Registers were generally incorporated into the South African Register unless there were overlapping rights in which case they continued to cover the applicable geographic area (with provisions to cover the whole of South Africa if the overlapping rights lapsed or were cancelled). I have no idea how many Transkei/Bophuthatswana/Venda registrations now exist - I imagine they would be mostly held by local companies and they are relatively few in number. They have a special numbering in place. They are managed by the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission in Pretoria.
Bophuthatswana was arguably the most well known of the bantustans as it contained Sun City (casinos being illegal in apartheid South Africa) and was the setting of an infamous coup in 1994 that saw the bantustan's last leader, Lucas Mangope, trying to cling to power and an invasion by Eugène Terre'Blanche's Afrikaner Resistance Movement.
Elsewhere in Africa, OAPI has grown at various junctures. Mali joined up in 1984 and was followed in 1990 by Guinea. Other countries have followed suit, but in the case of Guinea and Mali they had Trade Marks Registers of their own prior to OAPI accession (the others were Cautionary Notice countries).
Mali's Register has now ceased to exist, but Guinea's is still - somewhat questionably - operational for renewals, assignments, etc.
Finally, at the tip of Africa is Tangier (sometimes Tangiers). Prior to independence, Morocco was largely governed by France and Spain, except the city of Tangier which was under the administration of various countries as the Tangier International Zone. The city enjoyed libertarianism unlike the rest of Morocco and even much of Europe and became the home for a number of escapist residents. It also had its own trade mark law which remained when it was integrated into Morocco upon independence in 1956.
Parallel to this was a trade mark regime in "Morocco (Casablanca)"; the Casablanca often being added as this was the location of the Trade Marks Office and to distinguish it from Tangier. Registrations in Morocco (Casablanca) covered the whole of Morocco except Tangier.
In late 2004, a new trade mark law was introduced in Morocco to cover the entire country. Existing Morocco (Casablanca) and Tangier registrations would remain in force, each covering the whole country. Many trade mark owners would register in both. Upon renewal they will now only have to renew one of the registrations. This could be as late as 2024 in view of the 20-year registrations terms governed by the old laws in Morocco and Tangier.
These registrations can all be marked as covering Morocco, but many records may not have been amended to show this so you may still come across registrations in Tangier and/or Morocco (Casablanca).
Be careful with respect to country codes as codes used for these jurisdictions are often created internally or by database companies and then may come into use for other countries internationally. SS was commonly used for Sabah, but this is now the country code for South Sudan, independent since 2011. I have seen TK used for Transkei, but Tokelau is assigned this country code. Tokelau does not have a trade mark law (New Zealand registrations currently cover the territory) but it does possess a Domain Name Registry using this as its ccTLD.
We can come across many obscure countries when managing trade marks around the world. When it comes to post-registration matters like renewals then it is apparent that we have a few more jurisdictions to take into account.
![]() |
Some old Registers may not add new cases but their old registrations remain on record |
Sabah, formerly the British Crown Colony of North Borneo, had its own Trade Marks Registry operating from the capital Jesselton (now known as Kota Kinabalu). The same is true of neighbouring Sarawak.
Sabah and Sarawak joined with Malaya to form Malaysia. The region of Malaya, with connotations of its British colonial past, is now more properly referred to as Peninsular Malaysia.
The separate Trade Marks Registers remained in place although no new applications were possible; filing a Malaysian application was now required. For a stage, I understand it was possible to merge identical registrations in Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak into a single Malaysian registration but this is no longer possible. This is why there are still registrations in Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak being renewed (and assigned, etc.). However, they are all maintained and renewed at the Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia with headquarters in Kuala Lumpur but branch offices in Sabah and Sarawak.
These registrations provide protection in their relevant geographic area and there is a possibility that the owners of identical or highly similar marks may not be the same in different parts of Malaysia.
It is perhaps worth noting that Malaysia now contains three federal territories. Two of these are in Peninsula Malaysia (Malaya) but the other, the wealthy island of Labuan, was ceded by Sabah to the federal Malaysian government in 1984. As such it is possible that an owner of identical Malaya/Sabah/Sarawak registrations would not have coverage for the whole modern day country of Malaysia. (In this event it would, of course, be possible to make a new application in Malaysia.)
![]() |
Flag of Transkei, one of three bantustans that had their own trade marks law |
![]() |
Flag of Venda |
![]() |
The flag of Bophuthatswana |
Elsewhere in Africa, OAPI has grown at various junctures. Mali joined up in 1984 and was followed in 1990 by Guinea. Other countries have followed suit, but in the case of Guinea and Mali they had Trade Marks Registers of their own prior to OAPI accession (the others were Cautionary Notice countries).
![]() |
Flag of Guinea |
Finally, at the tip of Africa is Tangier (sometimes Tangiers). Prior to independence, Morocco was largely governed by France and Spain, except the city of Tangier which was under the administration of various countries as the Tangier International Zone. The city enjoyed libertarianism unlike the rest of Morocco and even much of Europe and became the home for a number of escapist residents. It also had its own trade mark law which remained when it was integrated into Morocco upon independence in 1956.
![]() |
Flag of Tangier International Zone |
In late 2004, a new trade mark law was introduced in Morocco to cover the entire country. Existing Morocco (Casablanca) and Tangier registrations would remain in force, each covering the whole country. Many trade mark owners would register in both. Upon renewal they will now only have to renew one of the registrations. This could be as late as 2024 in view of the 20-year registrations terms governed by the old laws in Morocco and Tangier.
These registrations can all be marked as covering Morocco, but many records may not have been amended to show this so you may still come across registrations in Tangier and/or Morocco (Casablanca).
![]() |
Pay attention with country codes |
We can come across many obscure countries when managing trade marks around the world. When it comes to post-registration matters like renewals then it is apparent that we have a few more jurisdictions to take into account.
16 May 2012
Madrid membership moving on up
Madrid membership has increased recently with the accession of the Philippines on 25 April 2012. It will be in force from 25 July 2012.
How this will work in practice is not clear to this writer and it may remain to be seen what happens as and when designations of the Philippines start to be requested. The Philippines, somewhat uniquely, has a trade mark law akin to that of the United States; the US took control of the islands in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War.
The trade mark law therefore contains provisions relating to use and it will be interested to see how these will be adapted for Madrid Protocol designations, if at all - there is no indication there will be a need to file anything like a Form MM18 as you must do when designating the United States. I have not been able to locate any amendments to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines - and the Philippines is a Common Law country - that reflect its memberships and commitments under the Madrid Protocol. I must say that it seems the Philippines has "sneaked in" without much warning. I'm totally in favour of an increase in Madrid Protocol membership, but a country must be ready (in terms of both legislation and organisational capabilities) or the rights obtained through International Registration could be limited and a country's IP image could suffer.
Filipino accession is part of a commitment from ASEAN member states to accede to the Protocol by 2015. I'm not quite sure this is a realistic timetable. Of the 10 members, the Philippines joins Singapore and Vietnam as members whereas the others require national filings for now.
Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand - which, along with the previous three countries mentioned, represent the most significant economies of the ASEAN block - will need to ensure they have backlogs of trade mark applications under control. There will be times when they will struggle to meet the 12 or 18-month examination timetable otherwise. Malaysia will require some updating of regulations to reflect its membership.
Brunei's law - drafted along the lines of Singapore - should be largely Madrid compliant with some small amendments. Laos, which pretty much operates a deposit system, should not have any difficulty adopting Madrid although the the internationalisation of the agreement does not meet so well with a country that has often chosen to remain somewhat isolated.
Isolation would be a word used quite freely with respect to Myanmar (Burma). This country is making steps to come out from the cold but Madrid membership by 2015 is likely to be too ambitious, in my view. Myanmar does not currently have a trade mark law and relies on the publication of Cautionary Notices. A new substantive - and Madrid compliant - law may not be a priority to a newly democratic government. On the other hand, if the junta remains in place then they have not previously buckled under international pressure so any leverage put on them to join the Madrid Protocol could have little impact.
Finally, Cambodia has Affidavit maintenance requirements on registrations. Perhaps these would not be requested for Madrid designations, but there is potential for an anomaly that they may wish to rectify before they can accede to the Madrid Protocol.
To go off on one of my typical tangents, I have just learnt that the Philippines have been less keen on accepting a previous Madrid Protocol from 1885.
Outside of ASEAN - much further to the south - noises from New Zealand suggest it is on course to join the Madrid party shortly. Colombia's membership could be in force as early as the end of this year - according to officials at the Colombian IPO, although local attorneys seem to feel Spring 2013 is a more realistic target.
Mexico has also got the ball rolling towards its eventual membership of the Madrid Protocol.
However, I had a discussion during the recent INTA conference with an agent from a smaller jurisdiction in the Americas (which shall remain nameless) and they were quite frank with me. They will fight their government tooth and nail for it not to join the Madrid Protocol. With local powerhouses like Mexico and possibly Brazil coming on board, coupled with pressure from the US and EU in particular, I wonder if they will be able to stop the Madrid juggernaut driving through their jurisdictions as it gathers more and more momentum. After a couple of years of stagnation with few new joiners, perhaps this momentum is about to build up.
However, I had a discussion during the recent INTA conference with an agent from a smaller jurisdiction in the Americas (which shall remain nameless) and they were quite frank with me. They will fight their government tooth and nail for it not to join the Madrid Protocol. With local powerhouses like Mexico and possibly Brazil coming on board, coupled with pressure from the US and EU in particular, I wonder if they will be able to stop the Madrid juggernaut driving through their jurisdictions as it gathers more and more momentum. After a couple of years of stagnation with few new joiners, perhaps this momentum is about to build up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)