<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Polish IP &#38; IT law - copyright trademark computer internet telecomm &#187; Regulation 40/94</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/european-union-law/regulation-4094/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rychlicki.net/en</link>
	<description>Tomasz Rychlicki Intellectual Property Law Internet Law IT Law Computer Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 10:32:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Internet domains, case I ACa 1087/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/08/02/6540/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/08/02/6540/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:15:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 10 CUC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 1206 CPC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 154 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 296(1) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 296(2)(ii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 296(2)(iii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 3(1) CUC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 5 CUC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Directive 89/104/EEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domain names]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-law issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[firm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal regulations on computer networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal rights or interests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Combating Unfair Competition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Appeallate Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Court for the Community Trade Marks and Community Designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish TLDs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation 40/94]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=6540</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court of Conciliation for Internet Domains at the Polish Chamber of Information Technology and Telecommunications (the CCID) in its award of 9 March 2010 case file 74/09/PA dismissed the complaint brought by Italian company Bisazza against Polish entrepreneur Rafał Kacprzak Installation.pl from Wrocław who registered the following domain names: bisazza.pl, bisazza.com.pl and bisazza-installation.com. Bisazza [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/08/02/6540/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case XXII GWzt 17/09</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/06/28/7754/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/06/28/7754/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:45:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[EU law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-traditional trade marks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal name]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal rights or interests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Court for the Community Trade Marks and Community Designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation 40/94]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surname]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7754</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Leszek Dudarski sued PRO-MED POLSKA Daniel Celej for the infringement of the CTM KLIMUSZKO no. 003533692. Mr Dudarski is a licensee of this trade mark. The CTM is the surname of Father Czesław Andrzej Klimuszko, the famous priest and herbalist. The right to use the word trade mark KLIMUSZKO and recipes belongs to the church [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/06/28/7754/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case XXII GWzt 3/09</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2009/11/27/7746/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2009/11/27/7746/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 07:51:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 296(1) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Directive 89/104/EEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Court for the Community Trade Marks and Community Designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation 40/94]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7746</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The plaintiff in this case was Theatermogul ehf, owner of the CTM CAVEWOMAN no. 005051545 which was registered in Class 41 for services such as theatrical performances and orchestral services, production of radio and television broadcasts and programmes. The plaintiff also owned several Polish registrations, such as KOBIETA JASKINIOWIEC, JASKINIÓWKA, W OBRONIE KOBIETY–JASKINIOWCA, W OBRONIE [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2009/11/27/7746/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case I ACa 16/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2009/10/08/852/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2009/10/08/852/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 19:22:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[advertising law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[competition law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Directive 89/104/EEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judgments of Court of Justice of the EC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Court for the Community Trade Marks and Community Designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation 40/94]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unfair competition law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=852</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The French company Marin’s International brought a case before the Court for the Community Trade Marks and Community Designs, located in Warsaw (in Polish: Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie Wydzial XXII Sąd Wspólnotowych Znaków Towarowych i Wzorów Przemysłowych). The issue concerned the use of CTMs Marin’s and Lama by the Polish company Display Flash Poland sp. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2009/10/08/852/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case I CSK 96/08</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2009/03/20/4403/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2009/03/20/4403/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:30:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[famous trade marks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judgments of Court of Justice of the EC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knock-offs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[likelihood of confusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[look-alikes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-traditional trade marks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parasitic imitation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Appeallate Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Court for the Community Trade Marks and Community Designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish District Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product packaging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation 40/94]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[slavish imitation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unfair competition delict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unfair competition law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[well known trade marks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=4403</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the shade of the recent opinion of Advocate General Eleanor Sharpston QC given to the Court of Justice of the European Communities in case C‑529/07, Chocoladefabriken Lindt &#038; Sprüngli AG v Franz Hauswirth GmbH, here is the story of couple of judgments decided in the recent suits brought against the Polish company Terravita by [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2009/03/20/4403/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

