Trade mark (Commercial) meaning

This Checklist pinpoints the principal provisions commonly found in a trade mark coexistence agreement. It may serve as a prompt for matters to address when preparing, assessing, or negotiating these arrangements. It can be relied upon as a list of points to review at drafting stage, during review, and throughout negotiations and sign-off process. It may equally be tailored as heads of terms to capture core positions whilst a full trade mark coexistence agreement is finalised. For help on doing so, see Precedent: Heads of terms—commercial contracts. For a model coexistence agreement, see Precedent: Trade mark coexistence agreement. For further detail on factors to weigh when drafting a coexistence agreement, see Practice Notes: Trade mark coexistence agreements and Negotiation guide—trade mark coexistence agreement. Checklist Points to consider Further information Notes (if any) (A) Key commercial considerations ☐ Parties Verify which entities will sign the agreement—specify who owns the trade marks (and related rights) and who is exploiting them. Confirm each party’s legal form and...

How to use this Checklist This Checklist pinpoints common matters that arise when negotiating and drafting the following agreements: Trade mark assignment (pro-assignor) Trade mark assignment (pro-assignee) For more detail on the legal basis for assigning trade marks and the formalities required, see Practice Note: Assigning intellectual property rights. It can also be repurposed as heads of terms to capture headline agreed points while a formal trade mark assignment is being finalised. For guidance on this, see Precedent: Heads of terms—commercial contracts. Checklist schedule for proposed trade mark assignment Checklist, further details, notes (if any) Key commercial considerations ☐ Parties Verify which entities will be party to the agreement—specify the current owner of the trade marks (ie the assignor) and the entity to whom they will be transferred (ie the assignee). Also confirm each party’s legal status and whether any third parties (such as group affiliates) are intended to benefit under the proposed agreement. ☐...

How to use this Checklist This Checklist sets out the main terms usually seen in a trade mark licence. Use it as a prompt when drafting, reviewing or negotiating trade mark licences. For detail on the legal framework and any required formalities, see Practice Note: Licensing intellectual property rights. For practical guidance on preparing a trade mark licence, see Practice Note: Drafting a trade mark licence—a practical guide. The Checklist can also be tailored as heads of terms to capture key points agreed while a formal trade mark licence is being negotiated. For advice on this approach, see Precedent: Heads of terms—commercial contracts... Checklist schedule for proposed trade mark licence Points to consider Further information Notes (if any) (A) Key commercial considerations Parties — Confirm which entities will be party to the agreement—identify which entity owns the trade marks (ie the licensor) and which entity will be using them (ie the licensee). Confirm each party’s legal status...

Alaska Airlines Inc v Virgin Aviation TM Ltd and another company [2025] EWHC 2505 (Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? The principal outcomes of Mr Justice Foxton’s analysis can be stated as follows: Where an unjust enrichment claim founded on failure of basis is invoked to stop payment of a contractual amount, the correct characterisation is that this engages the defence of circuity of action (para [49]). In that scenario, circuity of action does not mean the debt is never due; rather, it supplies a defence to liability. A broadly drafted no set off clause captures such a defence, so summary judgment can be granted (para [52]). To reach those conclusions, Foxton J reviewed a range of authorities in which no set off provisions were relied upon (see especially para [47]), and he also considered and clarified other decisions relevant to the underlying issues of principle. Accordingly, a debtor cannot avoid a summary determination merely by pointing to...

The complaint centers on what Google says are unfair and illegal licensing terms in its contracts for Azure. Google claims Microsoft’s Azure deals contain unjust and unlawful licensing conditions. The company says that in 2019 Microsoft moved from letting customers transfer their Windows Server licences to any cloud provider to imposing hefty fees when the choice wasn’t Azure. Now, Google argues, migrating licences to Azure costs next to nothing, but moving to a competing cloud can trigger a 400 per cent mark-up to purchase new Windows Server licences. Moreover, even when customers accept the expense of choosing a rival, Google says Microsoft then restricts security updates and other improvements that Azure users are not denied. They maintain that Microsoft is the only cloud operator employing these tactics, which have seriously harmed European businesses and governments, Google Cloud executives Amit Zavery and Tara Brady wrote in a blog post on Google Cloud's...

In this issue: Copyright & associated rights Trade marks/passing off General IP Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Copyright & associated rights Court of Justice rules on communication to the public for TVs in short-term lets (GEMA v GL) The court concluded that a landlord renting out short-term flats in a block, where each unit has its own television with an indoor aerial, infringes copyright by communicating every broadcast received by those sets to the tenants. Authored by Phillip Johnson, Professor of Commercial Law at Cardiff University and barrister at PackingtonIP. See News Analysis: Court of Justice rules on communication to the public for TVs in short-term lets (GEMA v GL)...

This Practice Note This Practice Note distils rulings on when restraint of trade provisions (restrictive covenants) in commercial and corporate agreements are enforceable. For fuller detail on restrictive covenants and the restraint of trade doctrine in commercial arrangements, also see Practice Note: Restrictive covenants and restraint of trade in commercial contracts. For a companion Practice Note outlining decisions on the enforceability of post-termination restraints (restrictive covenants) in employment contracts, see Practice Note: Decisions on post-termination restrictions and garden leave in employment contracts. This Practice Note also references certain key judgments reached under EU competition law. From 1 January 2021, EU competition law no longer applies directly in the UK. Where an agreement impacts trade within the UK, Chapter I of the Competition Act 1998 (CA 1998) will govern. The Chapter I prohibition bans anti-competitive agreements and is modelled on Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). EU case-law is still likely to remain relevant, but from 1 January 2024 the Retained EU Law...

This Practice Note offers an introduction to cybersquatting. It involves registering a domain name that incorporates another business’s trade mark with the purpose (or consequence) of taking unfair advantage of that mark. It also encompasses typosquatting, being the registration of a domain name featuring a misspelt version of another party’s trade mark. There are several avenues to pursue action against cybersquatters, including Nominet’s Dispute Resolution Service (DRS) and the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP)... What is cybersquatting? Also referred to as domain name squatting, it is the bad-faith registration of a domain name that matches or is confusingly similar to a trade mark or name, with the intention of profiting from the goodwill attached to that mark or name. The practice exploits the trade marks of businesses, individuals, or other entities, aiming to secure commercial benefit for the ‘squatter’ and/or to interfere with legitimate activities... Evolution and key characteristics of cybersquatting The phenomenon took hold in the 1990s during the early phase of internet...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer updated. It was initially prepared for Lexis Practice Adviser, in the US. It outlines similarities and differences between the protections available for typical categories of IP, such as literary works (copyright and trade secret); marketing imagery, characters and slogans (copyright and trade mark); product designs (design patent, copyright and trade dress) and inventions (patent and trade secret). It addresses coverage and duration, as well as scope and eligibility requirements too. Literary works—copyright versus trade secret protection For information to amount to a trade secret, it must truly be confidential, the proprietor must take steps to preserve that confidentiality, and it must confer a competitive economic benefit on the owner. Trade secrets usually comprise commercial or business information and may endure without limit, provided the secrecy is maintained. Copyright, by contrast, applies to subject matter such as literary works, audiovisual works, and sound recordings, and only requires that the work is fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright protection...

This Agreement is entered into on [ date ] Parties 1 [ insert name of party ] [ of OR a company incorporated in England and Wales with number [ insert registered number ] whose registered office is at ] [ insert address ] (Manufacturer); and 2 [ insert name of party ] [ of OR a company incorporated in England and Wales with number [ insert registered number ] whose registered office is at ] [ insert address ] (Distributor); each of the Manufacturer and the Distributor is a party and together they are parties. Background (A) The Manufacturer produces [ and supplies ] the Products. (B) The Distributor has agreed to distribute [ and support ] the Products on a non-exclusive basis in the Territory in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement...

This Agreement is entered into on [ date ] Parties [ insert name of party ] [ of OR a company incorporated in England and Wales under number [ insert registered number ] whose registered office is at ] [ insert address ] (Manufacturer) [ insert name of party ] [ of OR a company incorporated in England and Wales under number [ insert registered number ] whose registered office is at ] [ insert address ] (Distributor) Each of the Manufacturer and the Distributor constitutes a party, and together they comprise the parties. Background (A) The Manufacturer produces [ and supplies ] the Products. (B) The Distributor has agreed to distribute the Products on a non-exclusive basis within the Territory, pursuant to this Agreement...

This Agreement is entered into on [ insert date ] Parties 1 [ insert name of party ] [ of OR a company incorporated in [ England and Wales ] under number [ insert registered number ] whose registered office is at ] [ insert address ] ( Manufacturer ) 2 [ insert name of party ] [ of OR a company incorporated in [ England and Wales ] under number [ insert registered number ] whose registered office is at ] [ insert address ] ( Distributor ) (The Manufacturer and the Distributor are each a party and, collectively, both the parties.) Background (A) The Manufacturer [ manufactures and ] supplies the [ [ luxury OR premium OR top of market ] ] Products, which are [ associated with [ high OR the highest ] standards of quality in their field ]. (B) The image, and the level of service linked to the Products, are of [ the...