The Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks : Objectives and Principles
международной регистрации знаков сегодня и ее будущее развитие
Антонина СтояноваAntonina StoyanovaSenior Legal Officer
International Registries of Madrid and LisbonWIPOWIPO
сотрудник Международного Реестра товарных знаков
Paris Convention1883
18861891
1893
1925
1960
1967
1970
1989
Berne Convention
Madrid Agreement
BIRPI
Hague Agreement
BIRPI moves to Geneva
WIPO Convention
PCT
Madrid Protocol
More than 100 years of Experience …
Russ Suchard et Cie
NOT Printed
… More than a Million Trademarks Worldwide
IRN 158 574
This Longine trademark is the oldest international trademark still in effect.Originally registered in Switzerland in 1889, then internationally in 1893.
NOT Printed
Marking a MillionThe registration of the millionth mark by Austrian eco-company
IRN 1 000 000
NOT Printed
Objectives and Concept of Concept of the Madrid Systemthe Madrid System
Objectives
A simple, low-cost and effective system facilitating trademark protection in export markets through:
• one central application and registration procedure ensuring effects in a number of territories bound by the system
• one central procedure to maintain and manage an international registration with effects in all territories concerned
Going Global
Accelerated geographic expansionmore attractive as more trading partners joinincreased flexibility in targeting markets with respect to particular goods and services
Increased useby existing as well as new Contracting Parties (developing as well as developed) by small, medium and large enterprises
National (direct) route vs. Madrid (inter.) route
Different procedures Only one procedure
Different languages One language 1 of 3 (E/F/S)
Different fees in local One set of fees in CHcurrencies (exchange–rateimplications) Management of IRs:
Recording of changes One procedure in respect of all countries(in each separate country a different procedure)
Representative required Representative required only in case of from outset refusal
Comparison between national and international route
Legal Framework and Geographical Scope
Legal Framework
Madrid Agreement (1891)latest revised in 1979
Madrid Protocol (1989) latest revised in 2007
Common Regulationsas in force from September 1, 2009
Administrative Instructionsas in force from January 1, 2008
Law and Regulations of each Contracting Party
See at http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/legal_texts/http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/members/ipoffices_info.html
Madrid Union
2 Agreement only29 Protocol only (including EU)54 Agreement and Protocol
85 Members
Geographical Scope II 81 MEMBERS PARTY TO THE PROTOCOL
Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Belgium, Bhutan, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Estonia, Egypt, European Union, Finland, France, Georgia, Ghana, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands (+Netherlands Antilles), Norway, Oman, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, San Tome and Principe, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Zambia
underlined = Agreement also
2 MEMBERS PARTY TO THE AGREEMENT ONLYAlgeria and Tajikistan
www.wipo.int/madrid/en/members/ipoffices_info.html
The Madrid System in Trademarks World
Some 965,000 trademark applications were filed worldwide by non-residents in 2007of which
Some 370,000 are through the designation under the Madrid system (38%)
International Registrations in Forceas of December 31, 2009
515,562 the total number of registrations in force, equivalent to
over 5.6 million active national/regional registrations, belonging to
169,939 trademark holders
Main Principles
An additional route
An optional route
A closed system
One registration - a bundle of rights
Basic Features of the Madrid Protocol
Basic Features of the Madrid Protocol
Filing conditions: who, what, where to file?
Examination and registration procedure
International Bureau - formal examination and international registration
Designated Contracting Party - Substantive examination to confirm or reject the effects of IR
Centralized management of IR : subsequent territorial extension, modifications, renewal etc.
Filing Preconditions
Applicant having an attachment to a Contracting Party
Real and effective industrial or commercial establishmentDomicile,Nationality
(Articles 2 & 3, Paris Convention)
Having the mark registered or deposited for registration in the same territory( basic mark or application for a mark)
same person, same mark, same goods and services (or less)
Filing Conditions – Where?
An international application must be presented to the International Bureau through the IP office of the CP with which the applicant has the attachment (establishment, domicile or nationality)
- Filing through the Office of Origin of the applicant (Indirect filing)
Filing Conditions
One form -Official (http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/forms/)
One language (English, French or Spanish)
One standard of goods and services classification (Nice Classification)
One set of fees in Swiss Currency: online cost estimate (at http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/fees/calculator.jsp)
International Application
Content:
• Office• Applicant• Entitlement• Basis• Mark• Goods & services• Designations • Fees• Other indications
222
International Filing and Registration Flow
INTERNATIONALBUREAU
OFFICE OF ORIGIN
OFFICE
APPLICANT
Formal examination; registration; publication (Gazette); Certificate; Notification to all designated CPs
Substantive examination under domestic law, within 12/18 months
Protection = effect ofa national registration
Certify and forward the application to the IB
OFFICE OFFICE
ENEntitlementBasic markForm
Refusal
Latest Developments Latest Developments and Statistics
Enhancement of ROMARIN
As from January 1, 2009Notifications of provisional refusals, their confirmation or withrawal, invalidations or statements of grant of protection, received by IB are available in Romarin
35,925 International Registrations
Average Number of Designations 7.4
Average Number of Classes 2.6
Average Fee CHF 3,408
All Fees 57%< 3,000 CHF
General Profile 2009
Top Filer CPs in 2010(until September) as compared to 2009
Origin No. Filing 2009
Germany 2 713 1
EU 2 611 2
France 2 541 3
USA 2 375 4
Switzerland 1 057 8
Benelux 1,221 6
Italy 1,444 5
China 1,090 7
Japan 747 9
Russian Fed. 697 10
Austria 557 13
UK 655 11
Australia 597 12
Some significant filing increases in 2009 (as compared to 2008)
European Union 3,710 3.1%Japan 1,312 2.7%Republic of Korea 249 33.9%Hungary 245 14.5%Croatia 235 17.5%Singapore 200 20.5%
Application growth
Top Designated CPs for 2010( but only until September )
Origin 2010 2009 Share Growth 1.China 1 8 646 14,766 4.9% -17.2% 2.Russian Federation 4 7 855 14,150 4.7% -15.6% 3.United States of America 3 8 079 13,406 4.4% -14.7% 4.Switzerland 5 7 322 13,161 4.3% -11.7% 5.European Union 2 8 452 12,564 4.1% -13.4% 6.Japan 6 6 150 10,386 3.4% -18.5% 7.Australia 7 5 102 8,575 2.8% -18.6% 8.Ukraine 8 4 431 8,539 2.8% -19.7% 9.Turkey 10 4 257 9,844 2.6% -19.3% 10.Republic of Korea 9 4 305 9,539 2.6% -18.7% 11.Norway 11 4 205 9,787 2.5% -22.1% 12.Croatia 14 3 008 5,967 2.0% -20.2% 13.Singapore 12 3 392 5,957 2.0% -21.7% 14.Germany 13 3 194 5,593 1.8% -19.6% 15.Belarus 15 2 793 9,380 1.8% -20.0%
Where is the Czech Republic
IRs by Office of Origin, steady growth as from 2005-547,559,541, 607, 397 for 2009.At present 2010-190 IRsThe CzR is at the 17 th palce in number of applications for 2009With share of 1.1%, with a significant minus growth of -34.6%Individual Designations of Cz in IRs- slow decrease as from 2005-5183, 4554, 4020, 3524, 2819 for 2009At present 2010- 1448CzR is at the 34 th place, with share of 1.00% and -21.6% growth
Most Popular classes of goods and services in IRs in 2009
Classes Products and Services 2008 2009 Share Growth
Class 9 covers e.g. computer hardware and software and other electrical or electronic apparatus of a scientific nature 9,305 7,935 8.3% -14.7%
Class 35 covers services such as office functions, advertising andbusiness management 7,683 6,798 7.1% -11.5%
Class 42 covers services provided by e.g. scientific, industrial ortechnological engineers and computer specialists 6,092 5,337 5.6% -12.4%
Class 5 includes mainly pharmaceuticals and other preparationsfor medical purposes 4,868 4,553 4.7% -6.5%
Class 25 covers clothing, footwear and headgear 5,308 4,482 4.7% -15.6%
Class 41 covers services in the area of education, training, entertainment,sporting and cultural activities 4,882 4,469 4.7% -8.5%
Class 16 includes mainly paper, goods made from that material and office requisites 4,652 3,925 4.1% -15.6%
Class 3 includes mainly cleaning preparations and toilet preparations 3,979 3,405 3.6% -14.4%
Class 30 includes mainly foodstuffs of plant of origin, prepared forconsumption or conservations as well as auxiliaries intended forthe improvement of the flavour of food 3,191 2,991 3.1% -6.3%
Class 7 includes mainly machines, machine tools, motors and engines 3,294 2,857 3.0% -13.3%
Top 50 Holders in 2009
Novartis (CH), Lidl Stiftung (DE); Henkel (DE); Zhejiang Medicine Company (CN), Shimano (JP), KRKA (SL), Richter Gedeon (HR), L’Oréal (FR), BSH Bosh und Siemens (DE), Egis Gyógyszergyár (HU), Pfizer (CH), Janssen Pharmaceutical (BE), Bayer (DE), Glaxo Group (UK), Boehringer Ingelheim (DE), Nestlé (CH), Sanofi Aventis (FR), Callaway Golf Company (US), Siemens (DE), Deutsche Telekom (DE), Biofarma (DE), Beiersdorf (DE), Tui AG (DE), Syngenta Participations (CH), DSM IP Assets (NL), ITM Entreprises (FR), Kabushiki Kaisha (JP), ICN (PL), Spar (AT), Gazprom(RU), Kaufland (DE), Daiichi Sankyo (JP), Audi AG (DE), Unilever (NL), GDF Suez (FR), Hofer (AT), ZF (DE), BASF (DE), Novo Nordisk (DK), Brillux GmbH (DE), Beijing Wanjindao (CN), Pivovarna Union (SL), Christian Dior Couture (FR), Ningbo Far East (CN), Microsoft Corporation (US), Hangzhou Zhongce Rubber (CN), Mibe GmbH (DE), Strauss Adriatic (RS), Merck (DE), Ecom Holdings (AU)
International Registrations and Subsequent Designations -1996 - 2009
-6'000
4'000
14'000
24'000
34'000
44'000
54'000
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Registrations Subsequent designations
Signs of Recovery
2009- Madrid System IRs declined by 12.3 %, representing the first decrease since 2002-2003 and being primarily due to a fall in applications from residents of France, Germany and USA.Beyond 2009 there are grounds for optimism as international trademarks registrations under MS have returned to growth The experience of the first six months of 2010 points to a positive rebound in Madrid IRs
Electronic communication and Information Tools
Electronic Communications:Offices IB
OFFICES WIPOInternational Applications 6 AU BX CH EM US KR
Refusals 3 EM JP US
Statements of Grant ofProtection 2 EM JP
Modifications 6 AU BX CH EC KR US
WIPO OFFICES
Notifications 51
AL AT AU AZ BX CH CU CZ DK EEEM ES FI FR GB GR HR HU IE JPKE KR LT MD MK MZ NO PL PTRO RU SE SG SI SK TR US VN RSZM BA BT BG CY KP IR LS LR NASL SZ
Electronic Communications: Holders and Reps. IB
MM4 Subsequent Designation MM5 Change in Ownership MM6 Limitation of Goods and Services MM7 Renunciation MM8 Cancellation of International Registration MM9 Change in Name and/or Address of Holder MM10 Change in Name and/or Address of Rep. MM11 Renewal of I nternational Registration MM12 Appointment of Representative MM13 Recording a License MM14 Amendment of Recording of a License MM15 Cancellation of Recording of a License MM16 Subsequent Designation Conversion (EM) MM17 Claim of Seniority MM18 Declaration of Intent to Use MM19 Recording of Restriction Against Holder’s Right of
Disposal Fee payments
Electronic Communications: Holders and Reps. IB
Electronic Communications:IB Holders and Reps.
Irregularity Letter Provisional Refusal Invalidation (total or partial) of IR Cancellation (total or partial) of IR due to Ceasing of Effect Statement of Grant of Protection 2nd Part of Fee Due Extension of Opposition Period Final Decisions
Notifications
Information Products & Services provided by IB
Various legal texts, guide and information notices (WIPO LexSearch, new tool, as from Sept2010, http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/),specific Madrid legal texts, http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/legal_texts/
WIPO Gazette of International Marks
Fee Calculator: on-line costing service
Madrid Simulator: on-line filing guide tool
ROMARIN: on-line search database
Country specific legal information on national procedures in relation to Madrid Protocolfree access at http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/
Information ConcerningProcedures Before IP Offices
The legal framework of Madrid system includes the national Trademark Legislations of all Madrid Member states.In order to improve information concerning this issue, WIPO provides specific information in regard to procedures before IPOffices,
76 country profiles to date
hp://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/members/ipoffices_info.html
International Application Simulator
The simulator is designed to respond specifically to the individual need in using the Madrid System when seeking protection of your mark abroad. At the end of the simulation, it will also help you estimate the cost of registering your mark through the Madrid System. http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/madrid_simulator/
E- Payment
Payment of fees with regard to IAs and IRs, as notified by IB in irregularity letters at:online services :http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/services/Made through a credit card or through a current account with WIPOAny queries regarding e-payment at: [email protected]
Recent Accessions
The most recent Members of MP are
Madagascar(P): January 28, 2008Ghana (P): September 16, 2008Egypt (P): September 3, 2009Liberia(P): December 11,2009Sudan(P): February, 16, 2010Kazakhstan (P): December 9, 2010
Prospective Accessions
Most promising: Mexico, Tajikistan(A), Algeria (A)
Under consideration:
Canada, Indonesia, New Zealand, Thailand, South Africa, Brazil, India
Conclusion: the Madrid System
• A simple, low-cost and effective international TM application and registration system (1891 - 2010)
• Two treaties: the Madrid Protocol (1989) and the Madrid Agreement (1891)
• Benefits trademark holders in 85 members • Signifiant Instrument to facilitate global trade
Future evolvements
Simplification of MS- After the repeal of the safegurad clause and the predominant
position of the P more that 90% of the annual IRs are exclusively governed by the MP
- If and when the two remaining Agreement only member states accede to Protocol, the Agreement will cease to exist( or will be frozen)
- That will make the system simpler, even more efficient and more attractive
The Madrid System Simplifies
TM Registration & Management worldwide
Empowers Businesses in export markets
See what our users say about the Madrid system at: http://www.wipo.int/multimedia/en/madrid/madrid-videos/index.html
Thank [email protected]