26 April

Sticky

The Drastic RP7 Anti-counterfeit Campaign: How to Effectively Handle Intellectual Property Rights Infringements in Vietnam

Download The production, trade, and distribution of counterfeit goods are becoming increasingly complex, occurring quite blatantly and openly. Those who produce and distribute counterfeit goods demonstrate audacity by violating intellectual property rights and disregarding the law. Rather than concealing their activities, they now operate with such confidence that they use simple and easily recognizable methods to transport fake products. 1. The widespread counterfeiting of RP7 branded products Case 1: Recently, on April 23, 2024, police in District 11 of Ho Chi Minh City temporarily detained Tr.H.Th. (born in 2001 and residing in Tan Binh district, Ho Chi Minh City) for his involvement in...

25 April

0 Comments

Sticky

Proving bad faith: What lessons to be learned to reclaim trademarks in Vietnam?

Posted by Vu Thu Uyen

in Notable Articles, Trademark, Vietnam

Reclaiming a trademark through opposition or invalidation procedures is never simple, especially when the rightful owner has not registered the trademark in their target market. Nevertheless, a Turkish company successfully regained its trademark in the European Union through invalidation proceedings, despite not holding any pre-existing trademark rights there. The company’s registration had been made in bad faith by a third party....

24 April

0 Comments

Sticky

Understanding IP Law in Vietnam: Why Selling Genuine Products Might Still Be Infringement?

Posted by Vu Thu Uyen

in Case Studies, IP Practice, Notable Articles

1. RULE ONE is a corporation with over 10 years of experience in the field of fitness and sports supplements. Established in 2014 by the Costello family, who also founded the renowned Optimum Nutrition (ON) brand, known worldwide for the legendary Whey Gold Standard. After selling the ON brand to Glanbia five years ago, the Costello brothers developed a new brand. They continued to leverage the technology from their previous brand while incorporating modern advancements. Among their most prominent products are R1 Protein, R1 Gain, R1 BCAA, R1 Casein, R1 Energy+, and R1 Pre Amino. Rule 1 Protein, a premium...

24 April

0 Comments

Sticky

Assessing Intellectual Property Rights Infringement in Vietnam: Four Key Considerations

Posted by Vu Thu Uyen

in IP Practice, Notable Articles, Vietnam

Upon suspecting an infringement of their intellectual property (IP) rights, holders can submit a request to the Vietnam Intellectual Property Research Institute (VIPRI) for an assessment or expert opinion to determine the presence of infringement elements....

22 April

0 Comments

Sticky

Medical method inventions: What should be done to obtain patent protection in Vietnam?

Posted by Vu Thu Uyen

in Notable Articles, Patent, Vietnam

In Vietnam, methods of preventing, diagnosing, and treating diseases in humans and animals, known as “excluded medical methods”, are not eligible for patent protection under Article 59.7 of the Vietnam Intellectual Property Law. This regulation, established based on humanitarian policies, aims to facilitate access to advanced medical services for all societal classes, thereby improving public health by removing patent ownership barriers. However, it poses significant challenges for patent owners seeking to protect intellectual property rights for their medical method inventions. So, what are the excluded medical methods? How to identify these methods? And are there any available solutions for protecting...

16 April

0 Comments

Sticky

Cancelling a Trademark Registration in Bad Faith in Vietnam: What a Genuine Trademark Owner Needs to Do?

Posted by Vu Thu Uyen

in IP Practice, Notable Articles, Trademark, Vietnam

Download [Executive summary]: v. . Tân Việt Company, a Vietnamese enterprise, successfully secured the trademark "CAF PROFESSIONAL SOUND" under Registration No. 390821 with IP VIETNAM. Upon discovering this registration, Kafu Company, a China-based company, filed an invalidation with IP VIETNAM based on bad faith ground. Category Details Applied-for trademark Class & goods 09 (Audio equipment such as speakers, audio amplifiers, disc players).35 (Trading, importing and exporting audio equipment such as speakers, sound amplifiers, disc players). Application/Registration No. 4-2018-28713 (390821) Applicant Công ty cổ phần xuất nhập khẩu & đầu tư phát triển Tân Việt (Tan Viet Company) Genuine trademark owner Foshan City Nanhai Kafu Professional Audio Equipment Factory (Kafu Company) Action Filing a trademark...

15 April

0 Comments

Sticky

05 Notable Bad Faith Trademark Cases in Vietnam: What Lessons Should You Learn?

Posted by Vu Thu Uyen

in IP Practice, Notable Articles, Trademark

Download Trademark squatting or the bad faith registration of trademarks to misappropriate the intellectual property of foreign companies for illicit profit has become increasingly common in Vietnam. The more prestigious and reputable the brand, the greater the risk of becoming a target of this exploitative practice. KENFOX IP & Law Office would like to provide 05 notable bad faith trademark cases in Vietnam so that IPR holders who are currently conducting or planning to conduct business in Vietnam can understand the potential risks and challenges, having clearer picture of the legal processes in Vietnam, based on which better strategize their trademark...

15 April

0 Comments

Sticky

Trademark Oppositions In Vietnam: What Grounds And How To Effectively Apply?

Posted by Ly Dinh

in Notable Articles, Trademark, Vietnam

Download Intellectual property rights (IPR) holders never want their competitors to register a mark closely resembling their own marks. This is to mitigate legal risks, particularly in preventing confusion among consumers and deterring unauthorized trademark use or free riding on their goodwill associated with their mark. To mitigate these risks and safeguard the value of their brands and intellectual property in Vietnam, intellectual property rights holders must clearly understand the legal grounds for exercising the right to ”oppose” a trademark or to provide 'third-party observation”, as outlined in Articles 112 and 112a of the amended 2022 IP Law. What legal grounds justify...