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: e-payment@wipo.int

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 youAntonina.Stoyanova@wipo.int