<?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; Polish law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/polish-law/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 Sp. 500/11</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/30/7535/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/30/7535/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:02:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 107 §3 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 131(1)(i) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 131(1)(ii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 131(2)(i) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 77 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 80 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Administrative Proceedings Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Patent Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark invalidation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7535</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On July 2008, Barbara Hildman requested the Polish Patent Office to invalidate the right of protection of the word-figurative trade mark BIKINI CHRISTIAN DIOR PARIS R-175224 owned by Parfums Christian Dior from Paris, and registered for goods in Class 03 such as body and face care products. Barbara Hildman argued that BIKINI CHRISTIAN DIOR PARIS [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/30/7535/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case II GSK 839/10</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/17/7463/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/17/7463/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:03:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 154 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 169(1)(i) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 169(2) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 169(6) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 170 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medicinal product]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-use]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish institutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Patent Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Supreme Administrative Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of goods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark lapse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark opposition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark use]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trademark law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7463</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nufarm Australia Limited, the owner of the trade mark DUAL SALT TECHNOLOGY R-164428 registered for goods in Class 5, requested the Polish Patent Office to decide on the lapse of the right of protection for DUAL IR-0534713 owned by Syngenta Participations AG. Earlier before, Syngenta opposed the registratin of the trade mark DUAL SALT TECHNOLOGY [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/17/7463/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 586/11</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/02/7428/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/02/7428/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 09:11:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 107 §3 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 135 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 145 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[distinctive character]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Administrative Proceedings Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark refusal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7428</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Polish Patent Office refused to grant the right of protection for the word-figurative trade mark @ @lfanet Z-331247 applied for by @ALFANET Marcin Małolepszy from Borowo Kolonia for for goods and services in Classes 09, 37, 38, 42 and 45. The PPO decided that the applied trade mark is similar to the word trade [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2012/01/02/7428/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 723/11</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/12/28/7424/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/12/28/7424/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2011 13:17:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 132(2)(ii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[letter of consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Patent Office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of goods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark examination]]></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=7424</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In 2007, the Polish Patent Office registered the word-figurative trademark citibank handlowy R-190720, for the American company Citibank, N.A., a National Banking Association. In 2008, Citigroup Inc. applied for the word trade mark CITI HANDLOWY Z-337716. The Polish Patent Office refused to grant the right of protection, despite the fact that Citibank N.A. is the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/12/28/7424/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Personal data protection, case II SA/Wa 1009/11</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/12/28/7418/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/12/28/7418/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2011 11:39:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 23 PPD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 29 PPD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-adverstising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-law issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Protection of Personal Data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7418</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Polish farmer who owns an agriculture tourism farm and is advertising his services and business on a personal website, has found negative comments about his services at one of the Internet forum websites. He asked the administrator of the forum to remove his personal data. Some posts have been removed, but the farmer has [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/12/28/7418/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

