It's been way to long

The title says it all.

IP Freely has been very busy for the last god knows how many months and has really neglected his blogging duties and slew of loyal followers.

In the meantime we have had some interesting law: the Advocate General's opinion on the Adwords cases in particular. IP Freely really isn't sure what he thinks about this particular one. Fine I don't see that Google are infringing anyone's trade marks after all there are many legitimate owners (or users) of the same mark, not to mention the stifling effect stopping Adwords would have on Google and thus technology as a whole. However the AG's opinion to me just doesn't read right he bangs on about the similarities with comparative advertising etc which simply are not relevant and dismisses the potential of protection under that defence that I can't think of the name of (the one that's like the hosting defence but not) which would appear to be most relevant. It is also a shame that he bottled the chance to also comment on whether the advertisers themselves were liable for trade mark infringement, although reading between the lines one would say that it seems likely.

IP Freely is particularly looking forward to the ECJ decision on the above and more importantly the ECJ (and I guess the AG's opinion) on the other Adwords references. As well as a p2p case actually making it to court and being properly defended so that some kind of precedent can be established.

One not so interesting area of law (that IP Freely is currently trying to master but doesn't know where to start) is the implementation of a further 550 sections of the Companies Act 2006.......... we should have just kept the old one!

Anyway so long for now but in true Hollywood style I'll be back!

Fancy a refreshing Coke Cola?

The Company Names tribunal has ruled that a company called Coke Cola must change it's name and pay £700 to soft drink behemoth Coca Cola.

Coca Cola argued that the name Coke Cola Limited was misleading and takes advantage of Coca Cola's famous trade marks. Coke Cola made no opposition and must now change their name and pay £400 towards Coca Cola's application fee and £300 towards their costs. The ruling is historic as it is the first to be decided by a Company Name Adjudicator, this role was introduced by the Companies Act 2006 and came into force on the 1st of October (this year).

Under the Companies Act 2006 anyone can file an objection with the Company Names Adjudicator if a new company is incorporated under a name associated with the complainant, for which the complainant has goodwill or in fact a name that is similar and is likely to mislead a consumer by suggesting a connection between the businesses.

IP Freely is a big fan of this part of the new Companies Act (although it is not a fan of the staggered implementation of the act as a whole which merely provides for CONFUSION!) as previously it was difficult to object to 'similar' company names. Basically if it wasn't identical it wasn't worth complaining about and if it was identical then no one else could have registered it anyway!

On a more important note IP Freely has yet to see the Coca Cola Christmas Ad.....................