INTERNATIONAL TRADEMARK REGISTRATION
International Trademark Agreements
Under the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property,
trademark applications filed in other countries may take as their
effective date the filing date of a United States application. The
Applicant would thereby gain priority in such countries over other
applicants which file after the U.S. filing date. However, applicants
can take advantage of this international provision only by filing
within six months of the U.S. filing date.
On the other hand, while the U.S. has signed the Paris
Convention, it has not signed (but is considering) the Madrid
Agreement. U.S. applicants therefore may not file one application
covering the countries of the Madrid Agreement, but must register
country-by-country, except in the European Union, Benelux, and Malaysia.
The rights of trademark owners and applicants are controlled in part by
the following International Trademark Agreements, and in part by the
laws of the county (state) in which trademark rights are to be
exercised.
1. Trademark "Protection" Treaties
The first general group of treaties defines internationally
agreed basic standards governing intellectual property in each country.
For example, foreign applicants are treated on an equal footing with
nationals of the country in which registration is sought ("national
treatment") under the Paris Convention. These treaties include the
following:
- Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property
- Nairobi Treaty on the Protection of the Olympic Symbol
- Trademark Law Treaty
- Trademark Law Treaty - Articles
- Regulations Under the Trademark Law Treaty
2. Global Trademark "Protection" System Treaties
The second general group, known as the global protection system
treaties, ensure that one international registration or filing will
have effect in any (selected) signatory State. The services provided by
the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) under these
treaties simplify and reduce the cost of making individual applications
or filings in all the countries in which protection is sought for a
given intellectual property right. These treaties include the
following:
- Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks
- Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks
- Common Regulations under the Madrid Agreement Concerning the
International Registration of Marks and the Protocol Relating to that
Agreement
- Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks
3. Classification Treaties
The third and final general group of treaties consists of
classification treaties, which create classification systems that
organize information concerning trademarks into indexed, manageable
structures for easy retrieval. These treaties include the following:
- Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks
- Vienna Agreement Establishing an International Classification of the Figurative Elements of Marks
Trademark Jurisdictions
While a trademark owner's rights are controlled in part by the
above International Trademark Agreements, particularly as regards
registration, most questions of trademark law are decided by reference
to the law of the individual sovereign nations. This is particularly
true of questions of infringement. Individual trademark jurisdictions
include the following countries:
Western Europe
Eastern Europe
- Albania
- Bosnia and Herzogovina
- Bulgaria
- Chech Republic
- Croatia
- Czechoslovakia
- Estonia
- Finland
- Hungary
- Latvia
- Lithuania
- Macedonia
- Poland
- Romania
- Slovakia
Middle East
- Bahrain
- Cyprus
- Iran
- Iraq
- Israel
- Jordan
- Kuwait
- Lebanon
- Oman & Muscat
- Qatar
- Ras Al-Khaimah
- Republic of Yemen
- Saudi Arabia
- South Yemen (Aden)
- Syria
- Turkey
- United Arab Emerates
Commonwealth of Independent States
- Armenia
- Azerbaijan
- Belarus
- Georgia
- Kazakhstan
- Kyrgyzstan
- Moldova
- Russian Federation
- Tajikistan
- Turkmenistan
- Ukraine
- Uzbekistan
Northern Africa
- Algeria
- Egypt
- Libya
- Morocco
- Sudan
- Tunisia
- Tangiers
- Liberia
Southern Africa
Indian Subcontinent
- Afghanistan
- Bangladesh
- Bhutan
- India
- Nepal
- Pakistan
- Sri Lanka
Far East
Asean & Environs
North America
Central America
Caribbean
- Anguilla
- Antigua & Barbuda
- Aruba
- Bahamas
- Barbados
- Bonaire
- British Virgin Islands
- Cuba
- Curacao
- Dominica
- Dominican Republic
- Grenada
- Haiti
- Jamaica
- Martinique
- Netherlands Antilles
- Puerto Rico
- Saint Kitts-Nevis
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
- Santa Lucia
- Trinidad and Tobago
South America
- Argentina
- Bolivia
- Brazil
- Chile
- Colombia
- Ecuador
- Guiana
- Guyana
- Paraguay
- Peru
- Suriname
- Uruguay
- Venezuela
NAFTA - Intellectual Property
North American Free Trade Agreement
PART SIX
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Chapter Seventeen: Intellectual Property
Article 1701: Nature and Scope of Obligations
- Each Party shall provide in its territory to the nationals of another Party adequate and
effective protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights, while ensuring that measures
to enforce intellectual property rights do not themselves become barriers to legitimate trade.
- To provide adequate and effective protection and enforcement of intellectual property
rights, each Party shall, at a minimum, give effect to this Chapter and to the substantive
provisions of:
- the Geneva Convention for the Protection of Producers of Phonograms Against
Unauthorized Duplication of their Phonograms, 1971 (Geneva Convention);
- the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, 1971 (Berne
Convention);
- the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, 1967 (Paris
Convention); and
- the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, 1978
(UPOV Convention), or the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of
Plants, 1991 (UPOV Convention).
If a Party has not acceded to the specified text of any such Conventions on or before the date
of entry into force of this Agreement, it shall make every effort to accede.
- Annex 1701.3 applies to the Parties specified in that Annex.
Article 1702: More Extensive Protection
A Party may implement in its domestic law more extensive protection of intellectual property
rights than is required under this Agreement, provided that such protection is not inconsistent
with this Agreement.
Article 1703: National Treatment
- Each Party shall accord to nationals of another Party treatment no less favorable than that it
accords to its own nationals with regard to the protection and enforcement of all intellectual
property rights. In respect of sound recordings, each Party shall provide such treatment to
producers and performers of another Party, except that a Party may limit rights of performers of
another Party in respect of secondary uses of sound recordings to those rights its nationals are
accorded in the territory of such other Party.
- No Party may, as a condition of according national treatment under this Article, require
right holders to comply with any formalities or conditions in order to acquire rights in respect of
copyright and related rights.
- A Party may derogate from paragraph 1 in relation to its judicial and administrative
procedures for the protection or enforcement of intellectual property rights, including any
procedure requiring a national of another Party to designate for service of process an address in
the Party's territory or to appoint an agent in the Party's territory, if the derogation is consistent
with the relevant Convention listed in Article 1701(2), provided that such derogation:
- is necessary to secure compliance with measures that are not inconsistent with this
Chapter; and
- is not applied in a manner that would constitute a disguised restriction on trade.
- No Party shall have any obligation under this Article with respect to procedures provided
in multilateral agreements concluded under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property
Organization relating to the acquisition or maintenance of intellectual property rights.
Article 1704: Control of Abusive or Anticompetitive Practices or Conditions
Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent a Party from specifying in its domestic law licensing
practices or conditions that may in particular cases constitute an abuse of intellectual property
rights having an adverse effect on competition in the relevant market. A Party may adopt or
maintain, consistent with the other provisions of this Agreement, appropriate measures to prevent
or control such practices or conditions.