Sign up for a free trial to IAM magazine including full archive access by clicking on the button below
You need to have cookies enabled in your browser to permanently hide this pop up.
Most companies operate in a competitive and changing
environment. Those at the helm need to reassess
continually the company’s commercial strategy and
understand the changing IP landscape and the
company’s freedom to operate, while at the same time
seeking to strengthen the company’s position through
effective management of its intellectual assets. A
number of Australian decisions issued this year have
changed the IP landscape and have implications for
the management of a company’s intellectual assets,
including its patenting strategy.
This chapter looks at the major IP developments in
China and Hong Kong over the past year.
Heraclitus said that “a hidden connection is stronger
than an obvious one”. In the world of advertising many
hidden connections exist, which can be considered from
two key angles:
• the legality of an advertisement or its claims – an issue that affects the advertiser and the agency, as well as consumers and society in general; and
• the benefits of advertising from the perspective of enhanced brand value – this can be measured not only in monetary terms, but also in terms of the licensing opportunities to which it may lead.
Over the past year the courts have considered a myriad
of IP issues, contributing to the advancement of IP
law and practice in Malaysia. This chapter highlights
several interesting cases, two of which involved
The Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) has
proposed a wide range of amendments to the Patent Act,
even though the current act has been in force only since
July 1 2004. In February and March 2009, TIPO held a
series of public hearings with practitioners and various
interested groups, and eventually published a new draft
Patent Act on August 3 2009. The draft act would
change all but eight of the current act’s 138 articles.
TIPO argues that the proposed amendments will
improve Taiwan’s patent practice and facilitate future
Thailand’s IP laws have come under increased scrutiny
as the country pushes to overcome its long-held
reputation as a haven for counterfeiting and piracy.
Efforts to transform this perception – and the
underlying reality – have taken two forms. First,
increased enforcement, led by government officials and
committed IP owners, is having a meaningful impact on
the market. Second, there is a noteworthy trend among
both policymakers and the judiciary to modernise
existing laws and practices. New statutes are being
implemented and existing legislation is being amended
to help Thailand cope with the current challenges and
integrate more fully into the broader framework of
international IP law. Taken together, these legal and
practical changes offer appealing options and expanded
rights to IP owners, while also imposing certain new
obligations of which boardroom-level executives must
be aware. This chapter highlights some of the key
changes that are underway.
The Vietnamese legislation on the protection of IP rights
is mainly contained in the Intellectual Property Law
(November 29 2005). This law, along with other related
laws such as the Civil Code 2005, the Penal Code 1999,
the Competition Law 2004, the Customs Law 2001 and
the Information Technology Law 2006, forms a clear
legal framework for the protection and enforcement of
IP rights in Vietnam. It is a framework that is seen by
IP rights owners, IP practitioners and observers as
compatible with international rules in the IP area.