KASS IP exposé - December 2014

IP exposeINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY NEWS UPDATES

The IP Experts

www.kass.com.my INNOVATIONS DECIDE sm

Protecting Green Technology: Patents or Trade Secrets?

BY SAMINI THIRUCHELVAM

That Colour Is So You!

Do Angry Birds Bite?

Indonesian Copyright Law Updates!

3pg

Protecting Green Technology: Patents or Trade Secrets?

Malaysia - Singapore - Indonesia Your Professional Guide in the Intellectual Property MazeSM

Other Updates:

PPH Pilot Program between MyIPO and JPO begins!

KASS: Then & Now

...................................................................................................

Green technology has attracted a decent amount of interest in the past decade due to its limitless potential and promise to create a cleaner environment. Increased awareness among the public and rising demand for green technology has resulted in the rapid development of new green technology innovations and renewable energy.

An idea is a spark of the moment but realization of the idea could take a long time and relentless effort. Developing a green technology is a long process that needs constant improvisation. There is no guarantee that an invention will not be copied by others during the development phase of the product. The application of IP protection to safeguard one’s technology is necessary in this global age where unfortunately, the act of imitation and stealing ideas is prevalent.

Understanding Trade Secrets and Patents

Trade secrets or patents can be employed to protect the technical aspects of an invention. A trade secret relates to any confidential business information which provides a competitive edge to a company. Trade secrets encompass manufacturing or industrial secrets and commercial secrets. Information must meet two requirements to qualify as trade secret. First, the information

4pg

2pg

1pg

DECEMBER 2014HIGHLIGHTS

What a tremendous year 2014 has been! We turned 15 this year and despite it feeling at times like being on a rollercoaster with no brakes

and no end in sight, it was ultimately quite a rewarding ride.

That said, we absolutely could not have done it without you. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts for your friendship, patience and

support throughout the year and look forward to establishing an even closer relationship with you in the years to come.

We wish you a happy, meaningful and wonderful new year, as we bid farewell to 2014. For those celebrating Christmas, have a blessed and

joyful time with your family and friends!

HAPPY 2015

HappyHolidayf rom a l l o f u s a t KASS!

IP Exposé is published by KASS International Sdn Bhd

Suite 8-7-2, Menara Mutiara Bangsar,Jalan Liku, Off Jalan Riong, Bangsar,

59100 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

T (603) 2284 7872F (603) 2284 1125

E [email protected]

Regional OfficeKASS Regional IP Service Pte. Ltd.

190 Middle Road,#03-21, Fortune Centre,

Singapore 188979

T (65) 6338 1323F (65) 6334 3127

E [email protected]

Indonesia OfficePT. KASS Indonesia IP Services

46th - 50th Floor, Wisma 46,Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 1, Jakarta 10220, Indonesia

T (62) 21 574 8822 F (62) 21 574 8888E [email protected]

Note: The trademarks and images used in this newsletter belong to their respective owners. KASS does not claim any proprietary rights whatsoever; they are used solely for educational purposes.

P U B L I S H E R & P R I N T E R

This newsletter is intended only to provide an alert service on matters of concern or interest to readers and should not be treated as a legal advice on the issues discussed. For specific queries on IP matters, please contact us for further assistance.

2

DECEMBER ’14IP exposé

must have commercial value and secondly, the holder of the information must take reasonable steps to protect the secrecy by implementing confidentiality agreements. The unauthorized use of such information by persons other than the holder is regarded as unfair practice and a violation of the trade secret. Trade secret confers no right of exclusion and if other companies could arrive at the same invention by reverse-engineering or through independent researching, the trade secret will not be valid as the secrecy is no longer maintained.

Patents on the other hand, provide an exclusive right to the inventor for up to 20 years and prevent the use or commercialisation of the invention by others. Though costlier than trade secrets, patents are an effective form of protection for new and improved technologies in cases of infringement of the invention, which in turn attracts potential investors. Filing patent applications for green technology has been made easier by governments with the implementation of fast-track programmes to expedite examination of the applications. Such programmes are available in Malaysia, UK, Korea, Brazil, China and other countries. Trade secrets provide protection to an invention by maintaining it in secrecy while patent protection requires public disclosure of the invention.

Navigating the IP maze

The choice between patent and trade secret must be made carefully in order to fully utilize the protection conferred by patents and trade secrets and to prevent unnecessary public disclosure. The choice is not always clear cut as the nature of the product and the company’s business plans need to be taken into consideration to make an informed decision.

A factor that could aid the decision-making process is to consider whether a product can be reverse-engineered. If a product cannot be manufactured by manipulating publicly-available materials and without employing the process of manufacturing the product, then it is advisable to protect the product by trade secret rather than patent. Disclosure of the invention via patent publication may be detrimental as a competitor can analyze the product and find a way to manufacture the same product without infringing the patent, thus potentially affecting the market share of the applicant and reducing the patent value.

There is also the possibility that the product can be independently developed by another company without any reference to the present method of manufacture. Under these circumstances, it is sensible to opt for a patent rather than trade secret as broad patent claims are able to bar the marketing of similar products that might be produced via a different technology. In the case where the competitor’s product is an improvement of the present patented product, the competitor has to obtain a license for the patent in order to market the improved product.

Another factor to take into account is the possible longevity of the product in the market. In a situation where the field of technology of a product is fast-developing or the product reaches its maturity stage early, it is desirable to protect the product via trade secret, due to the considerable time and costs involved in obtaining a patent. If a product loses its appeal in the market after a very short period, it may not be worthwhile to file a patent for the product.

Copyright, as we know, offers protection that is considerably extensive, covering works in the realm of science (think software), arts, and literature.

As Indonesia heads towards becoming a creative economy, and experiences a rapid growth in Information and Communications Technology with the rise of the digital age, the Indonesian Government saw the need to update the Copyright Law in line with the times, to provide adequate protection and enforcement for existing and new types of copyrightable works. Thus, the latest draft of the Bill of Copyright was recently passed by the House of Representatives on 16 September 2014, to replace Law no. 19 of 2002 re. Copyright.

Some of the changes under the Bill of Copyright are:

Should you have any questions or need more information on Indonesia’s new Bill of Copyright, please drop us an email at [email protected].

Copyright protection duration is extended to the creator’s life plus 70 years (compared to the previous 50 years) after his/her death

Clearer definitions of terms

Landlord liability: Landlords who knowingly allow the sale of counterfeits or copyright infringing goods at their trade venue are liable to a fine of up to Rp 100,000,000.00

Collective Management Organization: Introduced to facilitate the collection of compensation on behalf of copyright owners for use of their works

•

•

•

•

Indonesian Copyright Law Updates!BY CARLA MONINTJA


3www.kass.com.myINNOVATIONS DECIDE sm

Do Angry Birds Bite?BY LOUIS TEO

any aural similarity is traded off against the dissimilarities such that on the whole, “the marks are more dissimilar than similar".

Kimanis did not deny that the conception of its mark was indeed inspired by Rovio’s creation, however, it was ruled that being inspired per se does not amount to copying and that "look alikes" are common in the market place. The Hearing Officer went on to elaborate and said that if the decision was made otherwise, it would be affording registered trademarks owners with excessive protection.

Furthermore, the evidence submitted in support of Rovio’s claim of passing off also failed to convince the Hearing Officer as most of the evidence was dated 5th of April 2012 onwards, which surpasses the application date of the “ ” mark. By this reason, the Hearing Officer held that

there was neither “misrepresentation” nor “likelihood of confusion”.

Lastly, in relation to the issue of copyright, Rovio had not made any submission nor tendered any evidence, apart from making a passing reference to copyright registration certificates from China and the US, which in itself was not sufficient. In the light of this, the Hearing Officer opined that copying has not been made out, on the basis that there is no substantial similarity between Rovio's two earlier trademarks respectively and the Application Mark.

This decision may come as shock, as many agree that there might not be confusion but nonetheless association between the marks. We view that there is a high possibility that Rovio might pursue this matter further. They are “Angry” Birds after all…

Case study: Using Patents alongside Trade Secrets

The answer is YES and the bitten one in this case would be Kimanis Food Industries Sdn Bhd.

Kimanis (the Applicant), a company that has been in the snack food business since 1987, applied to protect its “ ” trademark in Singapore on the 5th of April 2012.

The application was accepted and subsequently published on the 6th of July 2012 for opposition purposes.

Rovio Entertainment Ltd (the Opponent), the proprietor of the registered marks “ ” and “ANGRYBIRDS” (among

others) then opposed Kimanis’ application on the grounds that its own marks are well-known in Singapore and if the Application mark were to co-exist with its marks, it may cause confusion to the public at large, leading them to think that both the parties are related or have business links. Rovio also argued that there was passing off and copyright infringement.

In reply, Kimanis cited The Infamous Nut Co Ltd’s Trade Marks [2003] RPC 7 at [36], among others, where it was held that if the opponent relies on proprietorship of more than one earlier trademark, the registrability of the applicant’s mark must be considered against each of the opponent’s earlier trademarks separately and does not take into account any external added matter. In line with this, Rovio should not be permitted to combine both the “ ” and “ANGRYBIRDS” marks in the comparison test for similarity.

The Hearing Officer upheld Kimanis’ arguments by further stating that there was no visual or conceptual similarity between the application mark and Rovio’s marks, and that

A clever strategy relating to the use of patents and trade secrets was adopted by Coskata Inc., a biofuel company in the United States, in protecting its inventions which include transformative bioreactor designs and proprietary micro-organisms to produce ethanol for under USD1.00 per gallon. Coskata made the strategic move of using a hybrid of patents and trade secrets to protect its inventions. Its 3-step bioreactor process and syngas conversion system was protected by patent applications, while the identity of the microorganism used in the process was protected via trade secret. This is a brilliant move by Coskata as it is highly unlikely that the overall conversion process and the construction of the bioreactor can be maintained in secret. Also, patenting a naturally-occurring microorganism is not allowable under patent laws. This way, Coskata sufficiently protects its green technology without unnecessary public disclosure.

In a rapidly developing field, there is the risk of a product losing its shine and value due to widespread competition and new market entries. Certainly, it is important to protect green technology as it plays a huge role in climate control and reduces environmental hazards. Thus, it is vital to choose the right combination of IP protection in order to secure capital investments and achieve the maximum market value.


That Colour Is So You!BY VINCENT TEH

4

Was it an apple? A fig? A pomegranate? Or a bunch of grapes? Throughout the ages, there seems to be no consensus between generations of artists as to which fruity culprit was the fabled forbidden fruit that tempted Adam and Eve to sin. However, regardless of which fruit the artist decides to put the blame on, it is almost invariably red. Perhaps it is because there is something primordial about our interpretation of the colour red that we choose to associate it with passion, lust and temptation. Maybe we inherited our prejudice from our evolutionary ancestors who preferred juicy red fruits and nutrient-rich young shoots (usually red) over the less nourishing green leaves. Could it also be that we associate the colour red with the flushing of the skin and lips which indicates arousal? In fact, it was suggested that the use of blusher and lipstick by women is to fake arousal (yes they do it outside the bedroom too), which unsurprisingly, men find attractive.

Red is by no means the only colour that is laden with meanings and qualities. Humans have become very adept at deciphering and communicating with colour. We see this communication at work in our everyday life. We use gold as a symbol of riches and prestige; light blue for new-born boys; pink for girls; black for angsty hormonal teenagers with a predilection for the macabre; rainbow for people who are… happy. But what about colours as symbols of origin? As a child, whenever I was asked to paint the national flag, I always wished I was Libyan. Just paint a whole piece of paper green and you’ll have the flag of Gaddafi’s Libya. If we are already using combinations of colours as flags to represent our nations, shouldn’t colours be capable of representing a company or its products/services? Well, yes. In fact, it’s not all that new. A trademark is in its essence any sign

Generally, it is not easy to register a colour as a trademark, in fact the trademark laws of many countries (Malaysia included) do not specifically provide for the registration of colour trademarks. The problem is twofold. Firstly, the subject of which registration is sought must be clear, precise and objective. The reason for this is very simple. If you claim ownership of a piece of land, you would need to put a fence or some sort of demarcation along its boundary so others can easily know when they are trespassing into your property (and also for you to know when the "Make My Day Law" applies should you decide to shoot at them). Traditionally, with colours this “demarcation” proved to be quite difficult.

Recent studies suggest that most humans can distinguish up to 10 million colours. That’s 10 million colours short of the list of colour names stored within the cranium of the average human female. Colour is subjective. Most men I know have not the slightest clue of the difference between sanguine and maroon, or turquoise and teal. In fact, most of us struggle with the last three colours of the rainbow! As for clarity, to us burgundy is a wine-making region in France, aqua is fancy name for water. And no, we don’t have to learn to pronounce “mauve” properly because “pale purple” will do us just fine.

that is capable of distinguishing goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings. So, ask any man if he uses the little bluei pill and he’s likely to turn red. Show your girlfriends the ring your fiancé gave you in its robin’s-egg blueii box and they will be green. So, if a colour is associated with a company, can the company then register the colour as a trademark and thereby prevent others from using the colour? Well, yes and no.


Registering a colour trademark is not a walk in a park, and rightly so! Like Thor, who had to earn the use of his devastating Mjolnir, a company who wants the powerful monopoly over a colour must work for it. The second obstacle standing in the way of companies wishing to register a colour trademark lies in the definition of what a trademark is (a sign that is capable of distinguishing goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings). People generally think of colours only as part of a product’s design, and as such, do not readily associate one colour with a particular manufacturer. Consequently, for a colour to be registered as a trademark, the owner must be able to show that he has consistently used the same colour (or colour combination) to represent his products or business for years in order to prove that the consumers have come to associate that colour with his products or services. Because of this, very few colour trademarks are successfully registered compared to trademarks consisting of words or logos.

Power corrupts; and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The monopoly granted by trademark registration must also be curbed in order to ensure that the owner does not abuse its power. Accordingly, in the US, an application to register a colour trademark (especially if the trademark consists of a single colour) is subject to the functionality bar. The functionality bar is a mechanism which prevents a colour being registered as a trademark if the colour is functional. For example, pink was held to be functional for wound dressing as it simulates the colour of human skin and therefore makes the dressing less conspicuous. Also black was held to be aesthetically functional in relation to outboard motors for boats, because it exhibits both colour compatibility with a wide variety of boat colors and ability to make objects appear smaller.

Even after a colour trademark is registered, the owner’s right may still be curtailed, as shoemaker Christian Louboutin found out when he refused to be sole mates (sorry!) with fellow fashion house Yves Saint Laurent. Louboutin took YSL to court in the US over the use by the latter of a red outer sole (which Louboutin had registered as a trademark in 2006) on its high heels. The cat fight eventually went all the way to the New York Court of Appeal where it was held that although Louboutin’s red sole trademark is valid and protected, its protection is only limited to shoes with tops that are contrasted with the red outer soles. Accordingly, YSL was not found to have infringed upon Louboutin’s trademark because the YSL shoes in question are monochromatically red (red top and red outer sole). The reason behind the Court’s decision is that Louboutin was not widely known to have made shoes that are all red, and as such, consumers will not associate monochromatically red shoes with Louboutin only. The apple that falls outside the fence is fair game for all.


registered as a trademark, the owner must be able to show that he has consistently used the same colour (or colour combination) to represent his products or business for years in order to prove that the consumers have come to associate that colour with his products or services. Because of this, very few colour trademarks are successfully registered compared to trademarks consisting of words or logos.

The blue diamond-shaped tablet used to treat erectile dysfunction is a registered trademark in the US (Serial No. 75726287) of Pfizer Inc.The mark (USPTO Serial number 75541599), registered by Tiffany & Co., consists of a shade of blue often referred to as robin's-egg blue which is used on bagsUSPTO Serial number 79030715

i

ii

iii

This problem has largely been alleviated with the introduction of internationally recognised colour matching systems like the Pantone Matching System and the RAL System which assign codes to different colours and shades. A trademark application can be filed together with the corresponding colour codes for objectivity and clarity. Even with the codes, companies should take pains in ensuring overall clarity in their application to register their colour trademark. Not too long ago, the Court of Appeal in England ruled that CADBURY’s trademark applications for its famous CADBURY purple did not meet the requirements for registration as it was not sufficiently clear. In its application, CADBURY claimed "the colour purple (Pantone 2685C), as shown on the form of application, applied to the whole visible surface, or being the predominant colour applied to the whole visible surface, of the packaging of the goods". It was held that the word “predominant” leaves room for a host of different colours and/or designs that are not described in the application. Basically, CADBURY’s fence didn’t go round its trademark completely, leaving others to wonder where they can safely tread and where they are likely to be torn into pieces by a gorilla.

Registering a colour trademark is not a walk in a park, and rightly so! Like Thor, who had to earn the use of his devastating Mjolnir, a company who wants the powerful monopoly over a colour must work for it. The second obstacle standing in the way of companies wishing to register a colour trademark lies in the definition of what a trademark is (a sign that is capable of distinguishing goods or services of one undertaking from those of other undertakings). People generally think of colours only as part of a product’s design, and as such, do not readily associate one colour with a particular manufacturer. Consequently, for a colour to be

Power corrupts; and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The monopoly granted by trademark registration must also be curbed in order to ensure that the owner does not abuse its power. Accordingly, in the US, an application to register a colour trademark (especially if the trademark consists of a single colour) is subject to the functionality bar. The functionality bar is a mechanism which prevents a colour being registered as a trademark if the colour is functional. For example, pink was held to be functional for wound dressing as it simulates the colour of human skin and therefore makes the dressing less conspicuous. Also black was held to be aesthetically functional in relation to outboard motors for boats, because it exhibits both colour compatibility with a wide variety of boat colors and ability to make objects appear smaller.

Even after a colour trademark is registered, the owner’s right may still be curtailed, as shoemaker Christian Louboutin found out when he refused to be sole mates (sorry!) with fellow fashion house Yves Saint Laurent. Louboutin took YSL to court in the US over the use by the latter of a red outer sole (which Louboutin had registered as a trademarkiii in 2006) on its high heels. The cat fight eventually went all the way to the New York Court of Appeal where it was held that although Louboutin’s red sole trademark is valid and protected, its protection is only limited to shoes with tops that are contrasted with the red outer soles. Accordingly, YSL was not found to have infringed upon Louboutin’s trademark because the YSL shoes in question are monochromatically red (red top and red outer sole). The reason behind the Court’s decision is that Louboutin was not widely known to have made shoes that are all red, and as such, consumers will not associate monochromatically red shoes with Louboutin only. The apple that falls outside the fence is fair game for all.

So, if registering a colour trademark seems to be such a lot of work, why do people bother? Well, simply because they can. Imagine the next time someone tells you “that colour is so you!” you can indignantly reply “Darling, I own that colour!” and strut off in your red-soled Louboutins.

Note: The views expressed in this article are the author’s own, and need not reflect the views of KASS nor of its clients.

Copies of all FPO Office Actions and its English translation

Copies of all claims determined to be patentable/allowable by the FPO and its English translation

Copies of references cited by the Examiner at the FPO

Claims Correspondence Table which identifies how all claims in the SPO sufficiently corresponds to the patentable/allowable claims in the FPO patent application.

•

•

•

•


PPH Pilot Program between MyIPO and JPO begins!BY MAYURI @ PUVANESWARI NANJAPPAN

The Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO) and Japan Patent Office (JPO) recently initiated the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Pilot Program on 1st October 2014, for a three-year trial period. The PPH is a program which expedites the examination process of corresponding patent applications filed in the countries involved. The PPH allows a corresponding patent application – where the claims have been determined as patentable by a First Patent Office – to be used as a basis for expediting the patent application at a Second Patent Office.

This PPH program between MyIPO and JPO allows both Malaysian and Japanese companies to obtain patent rights quickly in their respective countries. Both Patent Offices will evaluate the outcome of the trial period in order to determine whether the PPH should continue after three years.

6

ExaminationPatent Application at First Patent

Office

PriorityClaim

Corresponding Patent Application at Second Patent

Office

Request for PPH

Claims are Patentable

The requirements for filing a request for PPH are as follows:

The following are the documents that need to be filed during the filing of the request for PPH:

The PPH expedites patent prosecution and enhances the search and examination results between the Patent Offices to improve the quality of examination worldwide. Please contact us at [email protected] if you need further clarification on the PPH procedures.

The Second Patent Office (SPO) patent application is in particular relationship with the First Patent Office (FPO) application, i.e., claims priority under Paris Convention, PCT national phase

The FPO patent application has at least one claim that was determined by the FPO to be patentable/allowable

All the claims in the SPO patent application sufficiently correspond to the allowable/ patentable claims in FPO patent applications

The examination has not begun in the SPO at the time for request for PPH

A request for Substantive Examination must have been filed at SPO either at or prior to the time of the PPH request.

•

•

•

•

•



THE PHILIPPINESWin for Gin Company

Philippine beverage company Ginebra San Miguel Inc. (GSMI), long famous for its namesake gin, can rest easy now that it has emerged the victor in its battle with Tanduay Distillers Inc. (TDI) over the use of the mark “Ginebra” on the latter’s “Ginebra Kapitan” products.

The trademark infringement case was decided at the Court of Appeals in early November, with TDI ordered to withdraw all its “Ginebra Kapitan” products from the market and pay punitive damages of P2 million, 50% of total gross sales of its “Ginebra Kapitan” products from the year 2003, and attorney’s fees to GSMI.

Read more at www.business.inquirer.net & www.rappler.com.

Around the region in an IP minute

VIETNAMCao Phong Orange Recognized as GI

Vietnam’s National Office of Intellectual Property (NOIP) granted Geographical Indication (GI) status to the Cao Phong orange on 4 November 2014, bringing cause for celebration to the people of the Cao Phong district after decades of effort in their endeavours to gain recognition for the Cao Phong orange.

Read more at www.vietnambreakingnews.com

5) What are some of your favourite memories in your

time here so far?Times when a group of us would go out and have fun, hanging out with my colleagues. ~ Linda

The most memorable memories is to see the growth of the company and being a part of the growth, together with the development of my career, i.e. from Patent Executive Senior Patent Executive Patent Agent Manager of Patent Division and IP Valuer. ~ Mayuri

Plenty of favourite memories with favorite KASSianz during our company dinner to company trip and every celebration we had in KASS. ~ Indra

“Senang berkomunikasi” (I get along well with all the staff). ~ Masgi

Hanging out with my ex-colleagues. ~ Vijay

2) How different were things back when you first started?

There were very few of us in the office so it was very quiet. ~ Linda

Peaceful and less stressful. Back then, we needed to request for internet connection from the secretary in order to do searches and once we were done she would deactivate the internet. The working hours were from 8.30am - 5.30pm. ~ Mayuri

We were seated at the same floor so could easily greet each other unlike now where we are scattered and separated by concrete walls.

Things were very simple and less complicated. Me and my other colleague still remember how eagerly we waited to get connected to the internet. LOL! Those were the days... ~ Indra

As part of our 15th anniversary celebrations we took 5 of our KASS originals (aka longest-serving team members) on a jog

down memory lane for this issue of the KASS exposé. Let’s find out what they had to say!

“Dulu senyap, sekarang bising” (It was quiet before, it’s noisier now). ~ Masgi

First started by assisting Mr. Kandiah on normal marketing stuff. No proper system during that time. ~ Vijay

3) And how are things now?

Totally different, a lot of things going on… a lot of changes in terms of the environment and staff. It’s nicer now. ~ LindaOver the years working life has changed a lot in KASS. Every day we are striving with our own goals & targets to achieve but at the same time I’m very glad to be a part of KASS’ growth. And last but not least we do enjoy and cherish every second we get together. ~ Indra

Now we have a pool of execs and paralegals with different backgrounds, a total number of 12 in the patent team. New systems have been introduced and all of us handle our own portfolios. Quality of drafts is strictly monitored and training is provided for our staff. Also, there are more activities from the Business Development department (talks, workshops, exhibitions, networking events, conferences, etc.). And we have offices in Singapore and Indonesia! Besides working smart, we also have company trips every two years, quarterly events, townhall meetings! ~ Mayuri

Now with more upgraded system, I can do more stuff than before on my own & I have my BD team members led by my genius superior (!!). We can do wonders in marketing activities, just the 3 of us. ~ Vijay

1) Do you remember your first day at work?I can’t really remember… it was a long time ago. ~ Linda

Ambiance was very quiet. I was nervous since it was my first job with no knowledge on IP. I was given a room at one corner of the office. There were only seven of us at that time. It was a very small group & we clicked well together, especially Indra & I were buddies since we joined the Firm at the same time. I learned a lot from Mr. Kandiah since I had one-to-one sessions with him. ~ Mayuri

The group was relatively small; about 5 or 6 of them & I was warmly welcomed by the seniors. ~ Indra

Before, when the company was smaller, I was always with the boss, now I work more independently. ~ Masgi

Yes. Totally new environment for me with lots of girls working here. I was the only guy besides Mr. Kandiah – so felt a bit uncomfortable. ~ Vijay

4) What do you like most about being at KASS?

I grew and still grow a lot in KASS – I learn and handle a lot of things, and meet a lot of different people. ~ LindaGiven the opportunity to learn new things and gain new experiences from good and hard times and to develop different skills. Young and vibrant team. ~ Mayuri

KASS is gateway for your very first success. ~ Indra“Kerja tak pening kepala” (Work is uncomplicated). ~ MasgiWe work as 1 family here & I love the environment filled with beautiful loving colleagues around. ~ Vijay

KASS: NOW...THEN

Qi Ting has an LL.B. (Hons) from the University of Hertfordshire, and gained experience in retail and medical education prior to joining us at KASS. She handles searches, registration and prosecution of trademarks and industrial designs, in addition to issues relating to trademark registrability and objections. When not hard at work, she loves jungle-trekking, travelling, painting, reading and visiting galleries and museums.

New Addition to KASS family!

8

If you have seen any interesting trademarks and patents in the gazettes that you think would be right at home here, drop us a line at [email protected]!

The APAA 2014 Council Meeting was held in Penang recently and the Pearl of the Orient did not disappoint one bit! The picturesque

sunsets, the unique heritage sites, and most importantly, the glorious food… it was everything we could have hoped for and

more. This year’s APAA meeting was a blast, allowing us to catch up and share experiences with old and new friends from far and near. Definitely has us looking forward to next year’s meeting –

Okinawa, here we come!

Trademark No. 2013003355Services: providing food and drink; temporary accommodation, restaurant. (Class 43)Owner: TAJRIA FOOD SDN BHD

Spiciest

APAA meeting in Penang ends with a bang!

Most AffectionateTrademark No. 2013013986Goods: Pastry & confectionery, cupcakes (Class 30)Owner: JOSEPHINE ONG CHING CHING & BENSON KHO MING SHEN TRADING AS LOVEY DOVEY CUPCAKES

Most StealthyTrademark No. 2013007551Services: production of animated films and cartoons (Class 41)Owner: AVANT GARDE STUDIOS SDN. BHD.

Most InquisitiveTrademark No. 2013007554Services: production of animated films and cartoons (Class 41)Owner: AVANT GARDE STUDIOS SDN. BHD.

In this edition of KASS IP exposé, we look at the most stealthy, most inquisitive, most affectionate and spiciest trademarks published in the past issues of our Government Gazettes. Check out which marks came out tops:


To the movies we will go…

Eager to keep up to speed on recent trends on trademark cases in EU and their implications in Malaysia? Then you’ve come to the right place!

On 17th December, together with Marks & Clerk Malaysia, we will be hosting an INTA Roundtable on that very topic. As the volume of cases that are litigated in EU is higher than in Malaysia, we’ll observe and explore the recent trademark decisions in EU and discuss how these decisions relate to Malaysian businesses.

Interested? Contact us at [email protected] for more information!

KASS wraps up the year with an INTA Roundtable

Halloween wouldn’t be Halloween without spooky creatures wandering the night and scary movies that give you chills down your spine. With that in mind, the KASS team headed to the movies in October to catch Draculla Untold, an entertaining tale of horror and fantasy with lots of action sequences in

between! Before the movie, the team feasted on some scarily spicy and devilishly delicious Thai food. If you haven’t watched it yet,

well, what are you waiting for?

KASS IP exposé - December 2014

Documents

Transcript of KASS IP exposé - December 2014