<?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; industrial designs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/industrial-designs/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>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:02:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case II GSK 206/06</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/04/25/7307/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/04/25/7307/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2011 14:21:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[3D trade mark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 8(1) TMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 8(2) TMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 9(1)(i) TMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industrial designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infringement of registered industrial design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[invalidation of a right in registration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-traditional trade marks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Trade marks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Administrative Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product packaging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark refusal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7307</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 16 July 1996, the Polish Patent Office refused to grant the right of protection for the figurative trade mark DVORAK IR-639197. On 27 August 2003, the PPO upheld its decision and ruled that the sign in question is similar to two figurative trade marks R-79913 and R-80064 that were registered with an earlier priority [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/04/25/7307/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Industrial design law, case VI SA/Wa 736/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/19/6425/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/19/6425/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:05:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 102 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 103 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 246 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 255 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[individual character of a design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industrial designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[invalidation of a right in registration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[novelty of an industrial design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=6425</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw in its judgment of 4 October 2010 case file VI SA/Wa 736/10 ruled that the protection of unregistered Community design that results from the Community regulations does not allow for its extension through the registration of that design. Moreover, the protection of an unregistered Community design starts from the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/19/6425/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Industrial design law, case VI SA/Wa 922/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/19/6422/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/19/6422/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:58:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 102 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 103 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 104 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 105 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industrial designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[informed user]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[invalidation of a right in registration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=6422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw in its judgment of 13 September 2010 case file VI SA/Wa 922/10 ruled on three important factors of the design law. The VAC held that the &#8220;overall impression&#8221; refers to the design as a whole, and not to its individual characteristics. It is therefore a general effect, the general [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/19/6422/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Industrial design law, case II GSK 932/09</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/10/6363/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/10/6363/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 15:54:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[appearance of the whole or a part of a product]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 102 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 103 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 103(3)(ii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 104 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 108 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 117 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[individual character of a design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industrial designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=6363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Administrative Court in its judgment of 19 October 2010 case file II GSK 932/09 held that an industrial design concerns the form of a product, i.e. external characteristics that are observable, and individual appearances of a product cannot be claimed only because the material which was used to achieve the final effect (that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/01/10/6363/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Industrial design law, case VI SA/Wa 1339/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/12/06/6245/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/12/06/6245/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 14:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[appearance of the whole or a part of a product]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 103 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industrial designs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infringement of registered industrial design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[invalidation of a right in registration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=6245</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw in its judgment of 3 October 2010 case file VI SA/Wa 1339/10 held that the &#8220;identicality&#8221; as understood in the definition of a novelty of an industrial design is not consistent with the meaning of the word &#8220;identical&#8221;, which means that the compared designs should be the same. Identical [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2010/12/06/6245/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

