Paraguay Paraguay Paraguay. Report Q188. in the name of the Paraguayan Group. Conflicts between trademark protection and freedom of expression

Similar documents
Spain Espagne Spanien. Report Q188

1. Consider standing 2. Consider the three elements to make out a prima facie case 3. Consider defences 4. Consider remedies

106TH CONGRESS Report HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COMMUNICATIONS OMNIBUS REFORM ACT OF 1999

Trademark Litigation A Global Guide. Poland. Kulikowska & Kulikowski Beata Wojtkowska and Monika Chimiak

TRADEMARKS & FREEDOM OF

Title 10: COMMERCE AND TRADE

Case 2:12-cv TC Document 2 Filed 12/10/12 Page 1 of 16

Case: 1:11-cv DAP Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/19/11 1 of 9. PageID #: 1

Chapter Three Assignment

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

-What are the five basic freedoms that are listed in the 1st Amendment?

Trademark Litigation A Global Guide. Greece. Ballas, Pelecanos & Associates LPC George Ballas, Nicholas Gregoriades and Maria Spanos

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

2. Model Act Provisions The Idaho registration statute adopts the 1992 version of the Model Act. I.C

One Hundred Fifth Congress of the United States of America

Date: 22 August Packaging Questionnaire. Questions

Damages and Remedies in Civil IP Cases An U.S. Perspective

LAW Rule of conduct enforced by controlling authority; provides order, stability, and justice.

Chapter 6. Disparagement of Property 8/3/2017. Business Torts and Online Crimes and Torts. Slander of Title Slander of Quality (Trade Libel) Defenses

WIPO INTRODUCTORY SEMINAR ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 02/08/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Civil Action No. COMPLAINT

Chapter 5. E- Commerce and Dispute Resolution. Chapter Objectives. Jurisdiction in Cyberspace

The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999

7 Problems Surrounding Intellectual Property Rights under Private International Law

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Order delivered on: 20 th August, CS (OS) No.1668/2013. versus

Civil Liberties and Public Policy

IC 24-2 ARTICLE 2. TRADEMARKS, TRADE NAMES, AND TRADE SECRETS

TORTS SPECIFIC TORTS NEGLIGENCE

Case 2:07-cv CM-JPO Document 1 Filed 07/30/2007 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

#1 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. MR RAJBIR ORS... Defendant Through: Ex Parte

FEDERALISM. As a consequence, rights established under deeds, wills, contracts, and the like in one state must be recognized by other states.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

Freedom of Expression Quiz

Ashok M. Pinto * I. INTRODUCTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:18-cv JTM-MBN Document 1 Filed 06/04/18 Page 1 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

LAW OF GEORGIA ON APPELLATIONS OF ORIGIN AND GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS OF GOODS

S A BILL. Calendar No To encourage the disclosure and exchange of information 105TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION

Case 2:17-cv EJF Document 2 Filed 10/02/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

THE POLITICS OF CIVIL LIBERTIES

Trademark Protection and Freedom of Expression

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE LOCHIRCO FRUIT AND PRODUCE COMPANY, INC., and THE HAPPY APPLE COMPANY,

The German Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (GRUR)

First Council Directive

USDC IN/ND case 1:18-cv document 1 filed 04/09/18 page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION

Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China

Plaintiff SCOTT STEPHENS (hereinafter Plaintiff ) through his attorney respectfully alleges: INTRODUCTION

Parody Defense: No Laughing Matter for Brand Owners. Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252 (4th Cir.

Case 6:13-cv MHS Document 1 Filed 03/01/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION COMPLAINT

REVISED APRIL 26, 2004 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No No TMI INC, Plaintiff-Appellee

The Description of Unfair Competition under the Current Legislation of the Russian Federation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 COMPLAINT

Prank as Parody? By James W. Faris

Noah v Shuba and Another

LICENCE AGREEMENT. THIS AGREEMENT is made the day of 20. A. HortNZ works for the best interest / benefit of growers and the horticulture industry.

MULTILATERAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS THE URUGUAY ROUND

UNDERSTANDING TRADEMARK LAW Third Edition

ACT AMENDING AND SUPPLEMENTING THE DESIGNATIONS OF ORIGIN OF PRODUCTS AND SERVICES ACT*/**/***

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:15-cv MLW Document 4 Filed 01/14/16 Page 1 of 38 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION ORDER

Case: 3:11-cv TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/07/11 Page: 1 of 13 PAGEID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

SOCE311. Session 3. Legal Aspects. Department of Social Sciences.

TAMAK DISTRIBUTION LTD & ANOR v PENTAGON UNIVERSAL LTD IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MAURITIUS. [Court of Civil Appeal]

TRADEMARK LICENSE AGREEMENT NON-AFFILIATED

on your blue computer graded bubble sheet in the appropriate location.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) E.D. Case No.

LATIN AMERICA SUBCOMMITTEE INTA INTERNATIONAL AMICUS COMMITTEE. Report: A Guide to Filing Amicus Curiae Briefs in Latin America.

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Preface...P-1 Table of Cases... TC-1

Certified South African Wagyu Beef Trade Mark Licence Agreement

CITY HALL 455 North Rexford Drive 4th. Floor Conference Room A Beverly Hills, CA Friday, December 16, :00 PM AGENDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Terms and Conditions for Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial Judges (PCSTJ.org) Trademarks, Logos, Service Marks Copyright

OFFICIAL RULES TO SUBMIT

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/03/ :48 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/04/2014

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE TO NATIONAL GROUPS

TORTS IN CYBERSPACE: THE IMPACT OF THE NEW REGULATION ROME II MICHAEL BOGDAN *

Case 2:17-cv JFW-JC Document 1 Filed 10/13/17 Page 1 of 11 Page ID #:1

CITY HALL. Beverly Hills, CA Tuesday, April 18, :00 AM AGENDA

STANDING COMMITTEE ON GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE TO NATIONAL GROUPS

TURKEY Industrial Design Law Decree-law No. 554 as amended by Law No of November 7, 1995 ENTRY INTO FORCE: November 7, 1995

Introduction to the Third Amendment of the Trademark Law of China. August 30, 2013

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

Case 1:07-cv LTS Document 1 Filed 03/15/2007 Page 1 of 20

LAW NO. 173 FOR THE PROTECTION OF AGENT IMPORTERS OF MERCHANDISE AND PRODUCTS. (Official Gazette No. 8979, Dated April 1966)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

(No ) (Approved July 13, 2011) AN ACT

LICENSE AGREEMENT. For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shall have the following meanings:

(d) an amplifier or loudspeaker transmitting a tape recording or other recording;

The Code of Conduct for the Mass Media and Journalists on the Manner of Reporting About Elections Regulation Number 6/2010

CHAPTER 416 TRADEMARKS ACT

Privacy & the media. Traditional and emerging protections in an online world.

Telkom prepaid Terms and Conditions Conditions of Use for the Telkom Voice Prepaid Services

Egypt Égypte Ägypten. Report Q194. in the name of the Egyptian Group by Samir HAMZA, Ahmed Abou ALI, Tamer EL HENNAWY and Heba EL TOUKHY

Terms and Conditions for FtWashingtonVet.com Trademarks, Logos, Service Marks Copyright Accuracy of Information

Introduction to The Bill of Rights. The First 10 Amendments

Transcription:

Paraguay Paraguay Paraguay Report Q188 in the name of the Paraguayan Group Conflicts between trademark protection and freedom of expression Questions 1) Analysis of current legislation and case law 1.1) a) What instrument of your law (eg. Constitution) guarantees the right to freedom of speech? The Constitution is the instrument that guarantees this right. b) What does the right to freedom of speech include? Is both artistic and commercial speech protected? If so, does commercial speech have a different degree of protection? Our National Constitution namely protects freedom of speech for the press, as web as the diffusion of thought and opinion; it does not refer to the arts or commerce. However, the American Convention on Human Rights ratified by our country, protects freedom of speech for editorials and the arts. c) Are also corporations or only individuals entitled to invoke freedom of speech arguments? The Constitution is equal to all, due to which we understand that juridical persons are also entitled to invoke said rights. d) Is free speech only protected from unwarranted governmental interference, or is it also implicated when a private party calls upon a court to enforce rules of law whose effect would be to restrict or penalise expression? The request ex parte is also implied. 1.2) a) How are free speech interests invoked in trademark litigation? Especially in regards to non commercial use and eventually when they are taken as satires. b) Is there a provision in your trademark law which specifically concerns the admissibility of e.g.: to the extent that such use may be considered as an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech? (Please specify in case use is understood as involving a 231

There is no provision in the Trademark Law that limits the recordal of a trademark, but it does as an action of unfair competition and infringement. The Trademark Law states that use or dissemination of false indications or allegations susceptible of disparaging or discrediting goods, services or third parties business con stitute actions of unfair competition. It also states that public use of a sign identical or similar to the trademark or commercial name, even for non commercial purposes, when such use may cause dilution of the distinguishing force or of the commercial or advertising value of the sign, or due to the unjust exploitation of the prestige of the sign, constitute an infringement. c) If no such provisions exist, how are free speech interests invoked in trademark litigation? Is there an open end clause or fair use clause in your trademark law which permits taking into account freedom of speech arguments? If not, are there any other gateways in your trademark law to permeate free speech concerns? Or do courts apply freedom of speech arguments directly with reference to the constitution? The Judicial Branch directly applies the d) How much discretion do the courts have in applying free speech concerns? They must judge according to principles of wise critic. 1.3) If there are trademark infringement cases in your country where defendant primarily sought to attack a company s ecological or employment policy, commercial practices and the like, do these cases also address the application of rules prohibiting defamation such as libel and slander or do they focus on the tarnishment of plaintiff s trademarks only? (The National Groups are not expected to elaborate on their country s laws prohibiting defamation.) No cases are known of in our country. 1.4) a) If you consider the trademark infringement cases in your country in which freedom of speech arguments were invoked what are the criteria applied by courts for determining whether a freedom of speech argument is justified? How important is the reputation of the trademark in question? Does it matter whether the use of the trademark in question is non commercial or may free speech arguments also be invoked if the trademark use is mainly commercial in nature? Does it matter whether the use of the trademark involves an expression or social discourse of objective/considerable value or a contribution to the public debate? Is the defendant allowed to express his views in a trenchant way? Or is the defendant required to report in a balanced way or even sparingly? If necessary, please differentiate between: to the extent that such use may be considered as an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech (please specify in case use is understood as involving a We are unaware of such cases. 232

b) Specifically, please describe how joke articles are assessed. They often lack legal connotation and are considered as light, superficial comments or even considered as jokes. c) May using another s mark as a badge of loyalty or allegiance be considered as an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech? Does it matter whether the scarves and other goods are sold to consumers? Does it matter whether the manufacturer indicates that the goods are not original? Yes, it may be considered as the exercise of freedom of speech, provided that it does not constitute patrimonial damage to the trademark proprietor and that it does not have commercial purposes. d) To the extent that such use may be considered as an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech please specify the cases in which the defendant is entitled to use another s mark for the purposes of comparison, point of reference, description, identification or to convey information about the characteristics of defendant s own. Comparative advertising is allowed by the local legislation, provided that it is not exercised abusively, with bad fait and that it does not cause damages to trademark owners. 2) Proposals for adoption of uniform rules 2.1) a) Should free speech interests be invoked in trademark litigation? Whatever the case may be, the Constitution may always be invoked in any litigation. When the economic interest of a trademark value is not harmed, it is possible to allow a broader scope of the right of freedom of speech. It is important to bind the essential constitutional contents to the effects of balancing both rights protected by the National Constitution; in other words, the right to freedom of speech and that to free competition. b) If so, should there be provisions in trademark law which specifically concern the admissibility of e.g.: to the extent that such use should be considered as an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech? (Please specify in case use should be understood as involving a It is convenient that to have legal provisions that would limit excess. c) Or should there be an open end clause or fair use clause or any other gateway in trademark law which permits taking into account freedom of speech arguments? Or should the courts apply freedom of speech arguments directly with reference to the Constitution? How much discretion should the courts have in applying free speech concerns? 233

We refer to the answer given in section 1.2 c): The Judicial Branch directly applies the 2.2) In cases where defendant primarily seeks to attack a company s ecological or employment policy, commercial practices and the like, should these cases be addressed in the context of a potential tarnishment of the plaintiff s trademarks or should rules prohibiting defamation such as libel and slander be applied? We refer to the answer given in section 1.2 c): The Judicial Branch directly applies the 2.3) a) Should there be limits to free speech in a trademark infringement context? b) If so, what should be the criteria be for determining whether a freedom of speech argument is justified? How important should the reputation of the trademark in question be? Should it matter whether the use of the trademark in question is non commercial or should defendant also be entitled to invoke free speech arguments if the trademark use is mainly commercial in nature? Should it matter whether the use of the trademark involves an expression or social discourse of objective/considerable value or a contribution to the public debate? Should the defendant be allowed to express his views in a trenchant way? Or should the defendant be required to report in a balanced way or even sparingly? If necessary, please differentiate between: to the extent that such use should be considered as an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech? (Please specify in case use should be understood as involving a We refer to the answer given in section 1.2 c): The Judicial Branch directly applies the c) How should joke articles be assessed? They should be evaluated, for example, according to the actor s intention (subjective criteria) and observe objective criteria as web (for example: means used, intensity, persistence, etc.) d) Should using another s mark as a badge of loyalty or allegiance be considered as an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech? Should it matter whether the scarves and other goods are sold to consumers? Should it matter whether the manufacturer indicates that the goods are not original? Yes, it could be considered as the exercise of freedom of speech, provided that it does not constitute patrimonial damage to the trademark proprietor and that it does not have commercial purposes. 234

e) To the extent that such use should be considered as an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech please specify the cases in which the defendant should be entitled to use another s mark for the purposes of comparison, point of reference, description, identification or to convey information about the characteristics of defendant s own. Is should be mandatory that use of a mark is not exercised abusively, with bad faith and that it does not cause damages to the trademark owner. 235