<?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; Art. 107 §3 APC</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rychlicki.net/en/issue/polish-law/polish-administrative-proceedings-code/art-107-%c2%a73-apc/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 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 1319/11</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/11/28/7296/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/11/28/7296/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 08:18:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art. 107 §3 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 131(1)(iii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 134 §1 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 151 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 245 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 7 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 77 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CC TLDs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Directive 89/104/EEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domain names]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Proceedings Before Administrative Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Administrative Proceedings Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish TLDs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7296</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Designer drugs are well-known as &#8220;dopalacze&#8221; in Poland (in English: boosters). They were freely available on the Polish market because of the legal loophole in the Polish Act of 29 July 2005 on Counteracting Drug Addiction. In 2010, after different mainstream media reported on several cases involving health problems caused by such drugs, the Polish [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/11/28/7296/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 562/11</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/11/04/7135/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/11/04/7135/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 15:06:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomasz Rychlicki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[absolute grounds for refusal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 107 §3 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 129(1)(ii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 129(2)(ii) IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 130 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 32 Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 7 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 77 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 80 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[generic sign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Act on Industrial Property Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Administrative Proceedings Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polish Patent Office]]></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=7135</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Polish Patent Office refused to grant the right of protection for the word trade mark flex fuga Z-297616 applied for by MAPEI POLSKA Sp. z o.o. for goods in Class 1 such as adhesives based on plastics and resins, silicone mortars, for goods in Class 6 such as decorative moldings, profiles, metal profiles, and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/11/04/7135/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trade mark law, case VI SA/Wa 875/11</title>
		<link>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/10/27/7106/</link>
		<comments>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/10/27/7106/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 07:38:12 +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. 145 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 152 PBAC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 164 IPL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 7 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 77 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art. 80 APC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of goods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[similarity of signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade mark invalidation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voivodeship Administrative Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rychlicki.net/en/?p=7106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Juliusz Marek Nabiałek who owns the word-figurative trade mark Platan R-210901, filed a request for invalidation of the word-figurative trade mark PLATANUS OGRODY NATURALNE R-210602 registered for Przemysław Sochański. Mr. Nabiałek claimed that both signs are similar and cause the risk of misleading the public as to the origin of goods and services, especially since [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/10/27/7106/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

