Trademark Coexistence Agreement India

TRAB found that it was not reasonable to completely ignore the co-existence agreement. However, TRAB believes that the protection of the interests of consumers should prevail, since this was the purpose of Article 28 (currently Article 30) of trademark law and trademark law as a whole. Overall, TRAB considered that the risk of confusion between brands and the risk of confusion should be taken into account in the decision to allow coexistence. In particular, it is worth taking into account: from the point of view of the right to transaction under Article 207, paragraph 1, of Article 207 of the Macau Special Administrative Region Trademark Regulation, which came into force on 13 December 1999, the following text is entitled „Authorization of the holder of previously registered trademarks or other industrial property rights that could confuse the purpose of the claimed trademark“ as well as by exclusive licensees, provided that they exist and that their contracts do not waive their respective consents,“ Macau`s legislation, which already co-existed in 1999 the creation of letters of consent for trademarks, took into account the interests of the only previous trademark licence as direct stakeholders. The public interest must be taken into account when reaching an agreement on the coexistence of trademarks. This is often the case in situations where two medical companies carry the same brand for unique products, which could cause confusion and have serious consequences for consumers. Companies must also comply with the rules on cartels and abuse of dominance. Courts may find that similar marks can affect competition in the marketplace. In some parts of the world, such as the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom and Japan, trademark coexistence is permitted and can be considered as one of the factors in determining the risk of confusion. By signing a co-existence agreement, companies using a similar brand can continue to use the brand without interfering with each other in transactions and proactively avoid any dispute or trademark infringement. In addition, parties to a co-existence agreement generally agree to limit the use and/or registration of trademarks to a specific territory and only in connection with certain categories of products and services.