Around the IP Blogs

SpicyIP reviewed a ruling from the Bombay High Court concerning the deceptive similarity between signs. The case at hand dealt with the names ‘ASĀVA’ and ‘RAMPUR ASĀVA’ in connection with whiskey, in light of an earlier trade mark, ‘THE ASWA’, registered under Class 33 for alcoholic beverages. The blog questioned the judge’s decision to rely solely on a phonetic comparison of signs, and to apply an Australian precedent directly to an Indian judicial proceeding.

The Afro-IP blog informed on a trade mark infringement case, which was decided by the High Court of South Africa. The case involved iCollege, providing educational services online, and Expertease Skills, an E-learning platform. Each business had a figurative mark containing ‘iCollege’ in them. The plaintiff, iCollege, sued Expertease Skills for using a confusingly similar mark, and also requested the transfer of the domain name icollege.co.za from Expertease Skills to iCollege. The blog sets out, in a step-by-step analysis, the reasoning of the High Court in dismissing the infringement claim.

The IP Helpdesk presented the main changes in trade mark registration practice in Chile following its adherence to the Madrid Protocol. Chile is one of the few countries to do so in Latin America, the others being Colombia, Mexico, and Brazil. The adherence will come into force in early 2022.

Kluwer Copyright Post discussed whether dynamic blocking injunctions (eg injunctions which apply not only against the infringing web-site, but also against any future mirror sites) are possible under the current copyright law in Egypt. The post’s author believes that such injunctions are indeed possible, but much depends on the judge’s discretion. For Kat readers, interested in the topic, this Kat also recommends a recent study on dynamic blocking injunctions in the EU.