<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">As
promised here is a little further detail on proposals #4# & #5:<br>
<br>
The Trademark Clearinghouse is a central repository for marks. If it was to be
a central repository for IP rights it would have been called the IP
Clearinghouse. <br>
<br>
The purpose of a mark is to distinguish the commercial origin of goods or
services not to distinguish those goods according to their geographical origin.
In contrast to common law based systems under civil law a sign does not become
a ‘mark’ until it is registered as a mark.<br>
<br>
In #5 Claudio was clear “Geographical Indications or Appellations of Origin
shall not be eligible for … Sunrise
or Claims …unless… also independently registered as trademarks” and in #4
Rebecca chose to underscore “Geographic indications (that are not also protected
as trademarks) are not trademarks”<br>
<br>
There is clearly great utility to providing a central repository for geographical
indications. Therefore the question before the working group should be: Can we
reach consensus on including geographical indications in a shared ancillary
database which does not flow to either Sunrise
or Claims for the final report?<br>
<br>
<br>
<b>Improved simplified language to bring together
individual TMCH #4 & #5 proposals together<br>
</b><br>
3.2 The standards for inclusion in the Clearinghouse are:</span><span lang="EN-GB"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom:12pt;text-indent:36pt" class="gmail-xmsonormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.1
Nationally or regionally registered word marks from all jurisdictions.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 36pt" class="gmail-xmsonormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.2 Any word
mark that has been validated through a court of law or other judicial
proceeding.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 36pt" class="gmail-xmsonormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.3 <s><span style="color:red"> Any</span></s> <span style="color:blue">W</span>ord marks
protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the mark is submitted to
the Clearinghouse for inclusion.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 36pt" class="gmail-xmsonormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.4 Other marks
<span style="color:blue">and indications</span> that constitute intellectual
property.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 36pt" class="gmail-xmsonormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.5
Protections afforded to trademark registrations do not extend to applications
for registrations, marks within any opposition period or registered marks that
were the subject of successful invalidation, cancellation or rectification
proceedings.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 36pt" class="gmail-xmsonormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri;color:blue" lang="EN-GB">3.2.6
Protections afforded to word marks protected by statute or treaty, do not
extend to [geographical] indications and designations [of origin</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri;color:blue">]</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB"><br>
<b>Background research<br>
<br>
</b>The TMCH rules are defined in an appendix of the AGB. Geographical
indications are not mentioned anywhere in the AGB. <br>
<br>
Deloitte were tasked with drawing up the TMCH Guidelines. The TMCH Guidelines
1.0 February 2013 introduces the first single mention of geographical
indications in 2.4.1<br>
<span> </span></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:36pt" class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">2.4.1 For
marks protected by statute or treaty, the relevant statute or treaty must be in
effect at the time the mark is submitted to the Clearinghouse for inclusion. <span style="color:red">These marks may include but are not limited to: geographical
indications and designations of origin</span></span></i></p>
<span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB"><br>
Section 2.4 is poorly drafted and needs work: for example in 2.4.1 the wording
“court-validated marks” should read “marks protected by statute or treaty” And
there are various incorrect references to trademark holders, assignment and
licensing in 2.4.2 & 2.4.3 etc.<br>
<br>
In November 2013 Deloitte released TMCH Guidelines 1.2 which introduced a new
section 5 “Verification Guidelines”. Section 5.5 expands “word marks” in the
title to “Applicable to Marks protected under statute or treaty”. <br>
<br>
Sub sections 5.5.1 - 5.5.8 use a confused single example of the geographical
indication “Scottish Wild Salmon” to illustrate how a word mark protected by
statute or treaty may be submitted to the Trademark Clearinghouse! Again the
wording for trademark holders, assignment and licensing often seems incorrect
throughout these subsections.<br>
<br>
<br>
</span></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="gmail_attr" dir="ltr">On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 4:22 PM Paul Tattersfield <<a href="mailto:gpmgroup@gmail.com">gpmgroup@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">Hi
All,<br>
</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB"><br>
Here is simplified language which brings TMCH #4 & TMCH #5 together after
discussions with Rebecca and Claudio.<br>
<br>
The thinking is: <br>
3.2.1, 3.2.2 & 3.2.3 flow to 7.1 claims & 7.2 sunrise<br>
3.2.4 flows to any ancillary databases<br>
<br>
3.2.5 qualifies 3.2.1<br>
The <span style="color:blue">new 3.2.6</span> qualifies 3.2.3 in a way that
makes it evident that GIs & AOs are implicitly accepted in 3.2.4. <br>
<br>
Best regards, <br><br>Paul<br>
<br>
</span><span lang="EN-GB"><br>
</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2 The
standards for inclusion in the Clearinghouse are:<br>
<br>
</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom:12pt;text-indent:36pt"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.1
Nationally or regionally registered word marks from all jurisdictions.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 72pt"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.2
Any word mark that has been validated through a court of law or other judicial
proceeding.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 72pt"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.3 <s><span style="color:red"> Any</span></s> <span style="color:blue">W</span>ord marks
protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the mark is submitted to
the Clearinghouse for inclusion.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 36pt"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.4 Other marks that
constitute intellectual property.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 36pt"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">3.2.5 Protections
afforded to trademark registrations do not extend to applications for
registrations, marks within any opposition period or registered marks that were
the subject of successful invalidation, cancellation or rectification proceedings.</span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 12pt 36pt"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri;color:blue" lang="EN-GB">3.2.6 Protections
afforded to word marks protected by statute or treaty, do not extend to
[geographical] indications and designations [of origin</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri">]</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"> </span></p>
<span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">Notes:</span><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB"> <br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri" lang="EN-GB">This proposal seeks
to address the various public comments seeking clarification and tighter
wording, by only introducing a small easily understandable change to the
existing text.<br><br>
It also recognizes the separate legal status and the global importance of GIs
and will help GI’s reside in a shared ancillary database to support voluntary
RPMs like the “Limited Registration Period” LRP voluntary RPM for .dot Paris. <span> </span>If the mark holders wished it would even be
possible to publish a list of GIs whilst the main trademark database remains confidential.</span></div></div>
</blockquote></div>