Canadian Trademark Blog

Maintained by Clark Wilson LLP

Oily Loonie offside Official Mark?

By In Branding, Famous Marks, Legislation

Dogwood Initiative, a British Columbia environmental group, is facing legal action from the Royal Canadian Mint over a campaign to add one million oily loon decals to loonies in circulation.  (For our international readers, “loonie” is the commonly used term used to refer to the Canadian one dollar coin.)  Dogwood’s campaign is intended to create awareness about the risks of oil tanker traffic on BC’s north central coast, in the hopes that legislation might be passed banning such traffic.

The Royal Canadian Mint has alleged Dogwood Initiative’s activities bring it offside the Currency Act, but query whether the Mint may also have an action under the Canadian Trade-marks Act (the "Act"), for infringement of the Mint’s Official Mark rights in the loonie.

Section 9 of the Act deals with Official Marks, and in particular, it prohibits the adoption in connection with a business, as a trade-mark or otherwise, of any mark which consists of, or so nearly resembles as to be mistaken for, an Official Mark. Read more

In Canada, Fraud on the Trademarks Office Requires Actual Fraud – Court Rejects U.S. Doctrine

By In Case Law, Registration

The Federal Court recently made clear that Canadian law does not recognize a rule equivalent to the U.S. doctrine of fraud on the trademark office, pursuant to which any material mistatement in the processing of a registation renders the entire resulting registration void.

In Parfums de Coeur, Ltd. V. Asta the respondent individual filed a trademark application in 1999 based on proposed use of the trademark BOD in association with wares identified as “hair care, namely shampoo conditioner, treatment, styling aids, hairsprays, hairpolish, perms, … .” The respondent subsequently filed a Declaration of Use signed February 12, 2004 declaring that by himself or through a licensee he had commenced use of the trademark in association with all the listed wares. The applicant began selling body sprays in Canada in association with the trademark BOD MAN as early as 2002, but when it sought registration in Canada, the respondent’s mark was cited against it. When challenged regarding his Declaration of Use, the respondent amended the list of wares to read only “hair care, namely shampoo, conditioner”. Read more

Canadian Distiller Wins Latest Round In Trademark Battle

By In Case Law, Registration

Just in time for Robbie Burns day, Canada’s Federal Court of Appeal has ruled that a Canadian distiller of whiskey can use the word GLEN in its trademark, without misleading Canadian consumers into thinking that its product is whiskey that is from Scotland.  This is the latest round in the battle by Bedford, Nova Scotia based Glenora Distillers to register the mark GLEN BRETON in the Canadian Intellectual Property Office in association with its single malt whiskey.  There’s no word yet on whether the Scotch Whiskey Association will appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Trade-marks Act Amendments: Put Down That Glass of Canadian Burgundy!

By In Branding, Famous Marks, Foreign Protection, Legislation

On December 31st, while many readers (and writers!) of the Canadian Trademark Blog were likely raising a glass to celebrate the New Year, long-awaited amendments to the Canadian Trade-marks Act quietly came into force.  The changes pertain to Section 11.1 of the Act which deals with geographic indications.  In particular, the amendments eliminated several terms from a list of wine names that had been deemed generic, and accordingly available for use by anyone, in Canada.

The amendments were motivated by an agreement struck in 2003 between the Canadian government and the European Community concerning trade in wine and spirits.  Under the terms of that deal, the Canadian government agreed to amend the Trade-marks Act to gradually eliminate the use of certain European wine and spirit names on Canadian labels, thereby opening the door to European producers to apply for the protection of these names as geographical indications in Canada. Read more

Section 45 Proceeding Practices to Change Again?

By In Legislation

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office has announced that it will soon open a public consultation period relating to proposed changes to Section 45 proceedings.  The Office advises its goal is to modernize and streamline the Registrar’s practice; what precisely this means, however, is not yet known.

Nonetheless, a few details have emerged: the anticipated changes will include a new practice of issuing, in limited cases, final decisions directly following the filing of evidence; changes are also expected to the Registrar’s practice concerning the granting of extensions of time.

We’ll provide a detailed discussion of the possible changes once the proposed practice notice is made available.

Practitioners Warm to Cooling-Off Periods

By In Legislation, Trademark Oppositions

Regular readers of the Canadian Trademark Blog will recall that this past fall we reported on a public consultation undertaken by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office respecting proposed revisions to trademark opposition proceeding practices.

CIPO has recently released a compendium of the comments and suggestions it received during the consultation process.

While the submissions touch upon a broad number of issues implicated by the proposed practice notice, their common thread relates to the proposed “cooling-off” period.  Nearly all of the submissions argue that to make the “cooling-off” period available only prior to the filing of a counter-statement is counterproductive to the amicable settlement of the proceeding.  Instead, they argue that the request for a cooling-off period should be available at any time during an opposition proceeding.

In a posting on its site, CIPO advises that the proposed practice notice will be amended “to reflect decisions taken by CIPO as a result of comments received from stakeholders during the consultation period.”  Precisely what changes CIPO will make, however, will not be known until later this month when CIPO posts the revised practice notice on its website.  The final practice notice is expected to be published in the Trade-marks Journal and come into effect in February 2009.

Trademark Damages Following Termination of Franchise

By In Case Law, Protection & Enforcement

The British Columbia Supreme Court recently considered the right to damages for the improper use of a trademark following the termination of a franchise agreement. In Fruiticana Produce Ltd. v. 575760 B.C. Ltd. et al., after determining that certain amounts remained unpaid under the  terms of a franchise agreement, the Court also concluded that the franchise agreement had been terminated and the defendants continued to use the trademark FRUITCANA for a period of time following the termination. Nominal damages were calculated on the basis of the formula set out in Louis Vuitton Mulletier S.A. v. 486353 B.C. Ltd. and the Plaintiff awarded $12,000. A permanent injunction was also granted.