GAP (ITM)有限公司诉GAP 360有限公司

Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases Pub Date : 2019-05-01 DOI:10.1093/rpc/rcz037

Chancery Division

{"title":"GAP (ITM)有限公司诉GAP 360有限公司","authors":"Chancery Division","doi":"10.1093/rpc/rcz037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Trade Marks – Opposition - GAP 360 – Travel related services - Likelihood of confusion – Descriptiveness - Scope of specification of services – Amendment - “all related to gap travel” - Requirement of clarity and precision – Whether a characteristic of the services in issue – Appeal to High Court","PeriodicalId":336842,"journal":{"name":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"GAP (ITM) INC v GAP 360 LTD\",\"authors\":\"Chancery Division\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/rpc/rcz037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Trade Marks – Opposition - GAP 360 – Travel related services - Likelihood of confusion – Descriptiveness - Scope of specification of services – Amendment - “all related to gap travel” - Requirement of clarity and precision – Whether a characteristic of the services in issue – Appeal to High Court\",\"PeriodicalId\":336842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz037\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpc/rcz037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

商标-异议- GAP 360 -旅游相关服务-混淆的可能性-描述性-服务规范的范围-修订-“所有与旅游相关”-清晰和精确的要求-是否属于争议服务的特征-向高等法院上诉

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

GAP (ITM) INC v GAP 360 LTD

Trade Marks – Opposition - GAP 360 – Travel related services - Likelihood of confusion – Descriptiveness - Scope of specification of services – Amendment - “all related to gap travel” - Requirement of clarity and precision – Whether a characteristic of the services in issue – Appeal to High Court

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases

自引率

0.00%

发文量