Many readers of this blog are frequent users of the Madrid Protocol system. Some probably qualify as “power users” of the Madrid Protocol system. What some might not be aware of, however, is that WIPO provides what is called its Guide to the Madrid System. You can see the book’s front cover at right. This is a 260-page book, and the big news is that this book just got re-released today in its 2022 version. Continue reading “Just released — a new version of “Guide to the Madrid System””
Nice people at WIPO received our poster
It will be recalled that the Tenth e-Trademarks Listserv Reception took place on Tuesday, May 3, 2022 (blog article with pix) and that we knew ahead of time that some nice people from WIPO (from the Madrid Protocol part of WIPO) were planning to attend.
Never wanting to miss a chance to pass along “asks” to an intellectual property office, the members of the listserv collected a bunch of “asks”. We prepared a big poster listing the “asks” and we put it on an easel so that people attending the listserv could review the “asks” and could sign the poster if they were comfortable doing so. You can read about the poster and you can see a big photo of it, and a list of the “asks”, here. At the end of the evening, we pulled the poster off from its corrugated cardboard backing and we folded it up and stuck it in an envelope and mailed it to the nice WIPO people.
I am delighted to report that today an email message came in from David Muls (photo at right), who is one of the high-up people at WIPO in charge of Madrid Protocol. It is he who received the postal service envelope at WIPO headquarters, with the folded-up signed poster inside. He sent us an email saying:
The poster was well received!!!!! 😀 We are impressed by the many signatures!!!
He provided a photo of the unfolded poster as it arrived in Geneva, and you can see it here at right. (I think in this particular photo he was mostly trying to capture the “asks” but I think all of the signatures came through as well on the physical poster.)
By the way I find myself from time to time writing phrases such as “nice people at WIPO” and I keep wondering if maybe that is actually redundancy in such a phrase. Or inherency or something.
Nice people from WIPO attended e-Trademarks listserv reception
(Updated to report that the nice people at WIPO received the poster. blog article.)
The e-Trademarks listserv reception took place as scheduled on Tuesday, May 3. About seventy people attended. I am delighted to report that two nice people from the Madrid Protocol part of WIPO attended the listserv. We greeted them with an 18 inch by 22 inch (46 cm by 56 cm) poster with a “wish list”. It was signed by about 41 of the listserv members. I will be mailing the poster to our WIPO colleagues. Here are the WIPO people and here is the “wish list”: Continue reading “Nice people from WIPO attended e-Trademarks listserv reception”
How to be unwise when naming your firm
One of the dumbest things that you can do when you are naming your intellectual property firm, it turns out, is picking a name that is more than 35 characters in length. If you make this mistake, it means you often can’t get paid.
A related dumb thing is arranging to have a street address that exceeds 35 characters in length. This, too, might mean that you can’t get paid.
It turns out that there is a simple and quick fix for this problem, as I will mention at the end of this blog article.
Time of day at IB returns to normal for US filers
On March 13 I blogged that US filers filing documents at the International Bureau needed to pay extra close attention to what time it is in Switzerland. The reason is that in the US, Daylight Saving Time happened on March 13. But it did not happen on that day in Switzerland. This meant that for the past two weeks, a US-based filer in (for example) the Mountain Time zone would be able to e-file in the IB as late as 5PM and still get a same-day filing date. This differed from the usual drop-dead time of 4PM.
Today (March 27, 2022) is the day that Daylight Saving Time happens in Switzerland. The consequence of this is that the time difference between the US filer’s time zone and the time at the IB is back to normal. So for a US-based filer in the Mountain Time zone, the drop-dead time returns today to the usual 4PM.
This change affects for example a US-based filer filing a PCT application at the RO/IB, and it affects the US-based filer filing a design application in the IB’s Hague Agreement e-filing system. It also affects the US-based filer filing documents at the IB relating to the Madrid Protocol, such as for example a Subsequent Designation.
Most readers of my blog will appreciate that the correct terminology is not “Daylight Savings Time” but “Daylight Saving Time”.
Many readers will also appreciate that EU has been trying for the past two years to get rid of this clock-changing. There have also been largely feckless efforts in various states of the US to bring an end to this clock-changing. I personally would like it if the place where I am located, and the places where patent and trademark offices are that I care about, would all bring an end to clock-changing.
Filing at the International Bureau and Daylight Saving Time
It’s that time of year again. The time of year when it is important to keep track of the fact that Daylight Saving Time is different in Switzerland from the way it is in the United States. This is important because you might be in the US, and you might be e-filing some document with the International Bureau of WIPO. For the next two weeks (until March 27), the drop-dead time for e-filing a document at the IB is an hour later than usual. Usually, to get a same-day filing date at the IB, an American filer would have to complete the e-filing by 4PM Mountain Time (which is midnight in Geneva). But for the next two weeks, you get an extra hour. You could complete the e-filing by as late as 5PM Mountain Time and it would still be a same-day filing date.
This might affect you because you are e-filing a PCT patent application at RO/IB. This might affect you because you are e-filing a Hague Agreement design application at the IB. This might affect you because you are paying a set of Madrid Protocol renewal fees at the IB. Or maybe you are filing an Article 19 amendment or a Demand at the IB.
Most readers of my blog will appreciate that the correct terminology is not “Daylight Savings Time” but “Daylight Saving Time”.
Many readers will also appreciate that EU has been trying and trying to bring this to an end. There have also been largely feckless efforts in various states of the US to bring an end to this clock-changing. I personally would like it if the place where I am located, and the places where patent and trademark offices are that I care about, would all bring an end to clock-changing.
Filing at the International Bureau and Daylight Saving Time
On October 25 I blogged that US filers filing documents at the International Bureau needed to pay extra close attention to what time it is in Switzerland. The reason is that in Switzerland, Daylight Saving Time stopped happening on October 25. But did not happen on that day in the US. Continue reading “Filing at the International Bureau and Daylight Saving Time”
Filing at the International Bureau and Daylight Saving Time
It’s that time of year again. The time of year when it is important to keep track of the fact that Daylight Saving Time is different in Switzerland from the way it is in the United States. This is important because you might be in the US, and you might be e-filing (or fax-filing) some document with the International Bureau of WIPO. Continue reading “Filing at the International Bureau and Daylight Saving Time”
A Madrid Protocol thing that USPTO needs to do as Office of Origin
Hello, readers in the US.
You know those notifications that you receive from WIPO about your Madrid Protocol cases? Those notifications from WIPO about your Madrid cases that do not tell you your attorney docket number?
Don’t you wish that each such notice would tell you your attorney docket number? Don’t you get very tired of having to go on a treasure hunt every time you receive such a Madrid notice from WIPO, to try to figure out what the attorney docket number is?
Maybe you wonder if there is some good reason why such notices do not tell you your attorney docket number.
There is a reason. If you’d like to know, read on. Continue reading “A Madrid Protocol thing that USPTO needs to do as Office of Origin”
The new Madrid Application Assistant
(Update: At the end of this article which I posted yesterday, I described a programming mistake in the newly released MAA software from WIPO. I wondered how long it would take for WIPO to get it fixed. Not even 24 hours have passed and already I received an email from a nice person at WIPO letting me know that they had fixed the problem. I tested and indeed it has been fixed.)
WIPO has just announced its new Madrid Application Assistant. Here is how WIPO describes it:
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has launched the Madrid Application Assistant, which automatically records all the information required to complete an international application.
The Madrid Application Assistant is the latest improvement to the service level of the Madrid Registry as part of WIPO’s drive to enhance the creation and management of trademark rights under the Madrid System.
You can see Information Notice No. 53/2020 and you can see a “learn more” page about the Madrid Application Assistant.
What exactly is this new Madrid Application Assistant? What is the problem, if any, for which the new Madrid Application Assistant is the solution? Who can use this tool? Is it a good idea to use this tool? Can applicants in the United States use this tool? How will this new tool affect US trademark practitioners? I will try to answer these questions. Continue reading “The new Madrid Application Assistant”