The well-known trademarks have deserved special attention and regulation since the first Andean Decision on Industrial Property. In the already repealed Decision 344 its protection was contemplated through two norms on the prohibitions to the registration of a trademark, but those were very badly written and were quite incongruous. Two cases of well-known marks were regulated in two different clauses, but the requirements and scope of the prohibition did not correspond in each case. The Andean Court did not manage to make a coherent interpretation of the norms so that both prohibitions had some sense and a different juridical scope, having rather the industrial property offices of the Andean countries to make this interpretation and delimit the two cases of well-known trademarks known referred to. In the current Decision 486 the Andean legislator sought to improve and clarify the protection provided to the well-known trademarks.
Thus, its regulation is considerably improved in the part of the registration prohibitions, a special chapter is devoted to “well-known distinctive signs” and its holders are granted a series of actions to protect their trademark. The Andean legislator decides not to distinguish – as it does, for example, the European Union and the European countries, as well as Mexico – between the well-known trademarks of Art. 6bis of the Paris Convention, the well-known trademark itself and the well-known trademark , regulating in the current Decision all these cases under the name of “well-known trademark”.
In this Webinar it will be addressed the scope of the regulation of the provisions on well-known trademarks in Decision 486, the interpretation that the Andean Court has given about them as well as the application of these norms in the different Andean Countries. Finally, it was indicated some deficiencies of the Andean regulation and the problems that this was generating in practice. It was atteded by 91 participants.
If you would like to listen to the recording, please visit: