ICT Policy Africa

security, cryptography and electronic certification activities; protect basic human rights, in particular the right to human dignity, honour and respect of privacy, as well as the

peoples' rights should necessarily guarantee human rights; http://confinder.richmond.edu/Cameroon.htm (50 of 71)4/12/2005 10:53:07 AM Cameroon considering that the enjoyment of rights and

public data must be a minimum of a level 2 Data Centre. Rights of Way/Way Leaves: Rights of way, way leaves, permits and clearances have been a persistent

by the respondent and so that registration was an infringement on the applicant’s right to use the trademark in Uganda. He further deposed that the applicant had never

Respondent to have locus standi, the Respondent's right must have been breached by the Applicant or the right it enjoys through the authority of a third

trademark infringement plaintiff must show a valid, protectable trademark in which he has rights prior to those of the defendant. The plaintiff herein has through the evidence of

trademark infringement plaintiff must show a valid, protectable trademark in which he has rights prior to those of the defendant. The plaintiff herein has through the evidence of

the person with the exclusive right to use the trademark in relation to the goods in or respect of which it is registered. Such right in the trademark deemed to

affect the rights of action against any person for passing off goods as the goods of another person or the remedies in respect of those rights of action

mark owner who successfully shows 5 likelihood of confusion, has in my opinion, a right of action in damages or for an account, and for an injunction to restrain the

submitted on the Appellant‘s entitlement to register the word 'Java 'in its own right and as a descriptive word. The Appellants Counsel submitted that the Assistant Registrar

to support a cause of action, namely that; 1. the plaintiff enjoyed a right, 2. the right has been violated, 3. the defendant is liable. It was submitted that to

in Southern Sudan hold the trademark and the exclusive Supermatch commercial territorial rights for both Uganda and Southern Sudan. It is the case of the applicant that certain

their own trademark rules regarding the scope of rights, applicable legal norms, conditions and enforcement of rights (see article 6 of the Paris Convention). Concerning

Is it the proprietary right assigned to the applicant conferred by the registered trademark? Can be asserted that such proprietary right to a trademark is

action.‖ The right of action by a plain reading of the section is the right of action of a rights owner of a trademark suing another person for passing off

Court was urged to look at S.36 of the Trade Mark Act that grants exclusive rights for use where the Trade Mark is registered. Counsel argued that since the Applicant’s

the 1st plaintiff. However, they are ineffective on account of being unregistered. A right in a trademark is conferred on registration in the Register of Trademarks of a

goodwill has a property right that can be protected by an action in passing off. Buckley LJ described the nature of the proprietary right in the case of HP Bulmer

Properties Act, 1982 applied to the suit land, that declaration conferred proprietary rights to the applicants. In his view, therefore, Platt, J.S.C., erred to hold that title

Whether or not the launch of Google SMS trader was a breach of the plaintiff’s rights? 3. What remedies are available to the parties? Issue No. 1: Whether or not

controlled by the Society. The rights assigned to the Society by this Deed are:(i) all their performing rights, and (ii) all film synchronization rights (subject to the undertaking

assignment the Applicant is said to have assumed the executive rights to control the distribution of the music rights, public performance for payment and broadcasting of the whole

pleaded are true” . And “if the plaint shows that a Plaintiff enjoyed a right, the right has been violated and the Defendant is liable, then a cause of action

various artistic works and owner of the copy rights there in if any. 2. Whether the defendants infringed the plaintiffs copy right. 3. Whether the plaintiff is liable under

a right; that the right has been violated; and finally that the Defendant is liable. The Plaintiff's rights are established under the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act

enjoyed a right, that the right has been violated and that the defendant is liable; Auto Garage vs Motokov (No.3) [1971] E.A 514. Needless to mention, a right is a

infringe the Plaintiffs moral rights under section 10 of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act. Moral rights include a right to claim authorship of the

73, 77(c) and (e) of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act 2006, the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Regulations SI 1/2010; Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act

first denying liability, claimed that they had not infringed the intellectual property rights of the Plaintiff because they obtained them lawfully. It was the Defendant’s contention

the author of the work has moral rights while the owner of the works has economic rights. These two rights may be merged in one person but that

Constitution”) which provides in its preamble that “…while fully recognizing the sovereign right of each state to regulate its telecommunications and having regard to the growing

DATA PROTECTION 25. —Principles of personal data protection. 26. —Rights of a data subject. 27. —Exercise of rights by data subject. 28. —Collection of personal data. 29. —Duty

od to denote use that is not merely token, serving solely to preserve the rights conferred by the mark. Such use must be consistent with the essential function 

]] the applicants in the passing­off application is that it has acquired common­law rights to the mark "Value" simpliciter and that it is through the use of this wor

] done in the court below. There are a number of cases which recognise the right of a respondent, in spite of having filed an answering affidavit, to argue at[[

 that intellectual property rights are negative rights meaning that they do not give the holder a right to do something but only a right to prevent others from doing so

] sold by others and the recognition of the general right of free competition, including the right to copy. (See: Cointreau et cie v SA Pagan Internat

] sold by others and the recognition of the general right of free competition, including the right to copy. (See: Cointreau et cie v SA Pagan Internat

e endorsement simply clarified and confirmed the monopoly in which it was seeking rights, whereas Iffco contended that by entering the endorsement the relevant trade marks[[1]

nce is raised, has lain by with full knowledge of his rights and of the infringement of those rights. See Policansky Bros v Hermann and Canard 1910 TPD 1265 at 1278

 These latter applications are still pending. During July 1996 Kappa assigned its rights in and to the trade mark applications to the applicant. The applicant procured 

justified as it was an expression of the Respondent's right to freedom of artistic activity contained in the right to freedom of speech and expression afforded to the[[1

4]] the subject matter of an intellectual property right with the authority of the owner of that intellectual property right, or goods to which that subject matter has been

Held ­ Section 34(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act 194 of 1993 provides that the rights acquired by registration of a trade mark are infringed by the unauthorised use,

ear right flows from the registration of the mark. The respondent's use of the applicant's mark proves the second requirement, namely infringement of the clear right. The

] assumption that these constitute proceedings in rem and that the situs of the right is where the Page 447 of [1997] 4 All SA 444 (A) Registry is located,[[2]

 get­up and the business associated therewith to the detriment of the applicant's rights. As a result the respondent's use of the STAR get­up is likely to give 

] of the aggrieved party or is connected therewith. The rights infringed by passing­off are the applicant's rights in an existing goodwill. Before the likelihood or otherwise[

] 1993 ("the Act"). In 1999, Uthingo became the sole authorised licensee of the right to operate the National Lottery, which it did using the "Lotto" name. The appel

mark from exercising his rights merely on the basis of priority of registration and it preserves whatever common­law rights there may be antecedent to the rights of the registere

 it was submitted, will require the Registrar to decide whether Nestlé has acquired the right in this country to what was referred to as the "advertising goodwill" in the characters

[1]] on section 34(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act. The section provides that the rights acquired by registration of a trade mark shall be infringed by the unauthorised

General principle is that appeal court determines whether judgment appealed from is right or wrong according to the facts in existence at the time the judgment was 

original registration and of the right of the registered proprietor to the exclusive use of the mark, subject however to the rights of concurrent user by any registe

] In the present appeal, the issue for determination was that of the competing rights of the Appellant and Respondent, for the registration of trademarks under section 17

y Christine Steiner "Intellectual property and the right to culture" in Intellectual Property and Human Rights (1998), the proceedings of a panel discussion published by

 sole right to distribute and sell the boats in Cape Town. The second applicant, represented by the first applicant, gave the first respondent such right without det

 assign, make over or in any way encumber" its intellectual property rights. Whether the rights vested in Herbal Zone is neither here nor there. Once Infitech signed[[

2]] to the Full Court1  was dismissed and the present appeal is an appeal of right.2 [2] The applications for registration predate the commencement of the 1993 Act a

reserve common law rights that are antecedent to the rights of the registered proprietor". The Act does not invest a prior user with a right ­ it derives from[[

in Roman block capitals and underlined. The device of a pepper appears to the right of the mark, almost as a full stop after the word MATES. [21] In opposing

[1]] the market. Editor's Summary The first applicant was the owner of all the rights in and to the get­up of its "spirit cooler" beverages sold under the trade

 ­ Infringement of ­ Requirements ­ Onus on complainant. [2]  Intellectual property rights ­ Unlawful competition ­ Application for interdict ­ Use of competitor's parts and

 a notice of appeal. An examination of the act established that the Appellant's right of appeal was not subject to the need to apply for leave to appeal. The[[1

(a) of the Trade Marks Act 194 of 1993 which sets out how trade mark rights are infringed. The court a quo found that the appellant's use of the respondent

the applicant; it has the constitutional right to challenge in court what it regards as an unfair limitation to its rights. Lastly, I have considered the 

 Article 5, which is entitled "Rights conferred by a Trade Mark", provides that a registered trade mark shall confer on the proprietor exclusive rights therein who shall be e

 Wrongful acts by third parties cannot in general destroy rights. This truism also applies to trade mark rights. It was in that context that Luster (supra) a

 should be upheld because of the Objector's extensive common­law rights and registered trade mark rights in and to the trade­mark Town Lodge and various other trade 

declaration of rights to obtain certainty. I do realise that due to the proviso to section 15, Beacon may nevertheless attempt to assert rights to Liquorice Allsort

[4]] not permit a rights holder to steal a march on an alleged infringer in order to settle a bona fide dispute about the boundaries of rights. Those disputes s

[4]] it violates a proprietary right in respect of the name or trade mark. It is unlawful because it interferes with a person's right to carry on business freely,[[4

entation of a baker and the name Bakers in prominent black letters. On the right hand side, in light brown there is a representation of a scattering of Baker's[

 give effect to the rights of registered trade mark holders wherever appropriate, it should also bear in mind the fact that such rights should not be permitted 

[2]] principles (the right to compete and the right to copy) and intellectual property rights, and also between different types of intellectual property rights. There is an[[2

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Section 34(1) provides: (1)    The rights acquired by registration of a trade mark shall be infringed by ­  (a)    the[[7

om asserting a proprietary right in a trade mark in relation to which no one else has in the same territory asserted a similar right.'" Nicholas AJA also cited

 Blax"). The Applicant contended that the Respondent was infringing the Applicant's rights as the registered proprietor of the Albex trade mark, and was passing off goods

9]] its trade mark rights have been infringed and that consequently it has established a clear right or at the very least a prima facie right to the relief sought

flict with other existing trade marks and also did not broaden or extend its rights. The Registrar of Trade Marks refused the application on the basis that the 

idas and other intellectual property rights globally which includes the enforcement of Adidas trade mark and other intellectual property rights. [4] The second applicant is 

 Section 8 of the National Health Act 61 of 2003 gives the patient the right to participate in any decision affecting his or her personal health and treatment.[[

ent ­ Plant breeders right ­ Plant Breeders' Rights Act 15 of 1976 ­ Provides for the application and registration of plant breeders rights ­ Court had to exami

Compulsory licence in case of abuse of patent rights.  ­ (1) Any interested person who can show that the rights in a patent are being abused may apply to

Patent rights In terms of section 45(1) of the Patents Act, the patentee has, subject to the provisions of the Act, for the duration of the patent, the right to[[

 this Court has jurisdiction to hear this matter and the applicant has the right to approach this Court to apply for the amendment of the patent. [5] The f

 it was of cardinal importance to ensure, not only that each tablet contained the right dosage at the point of administration, but also that as little as possible of[[

4]] the word because it sought "to include a carriage which is offset at a right angle to the co­linear line between the pair of telescopic props at an undefine

1]] a patent is to grant the patentee, for the duration of the patent, the right to exclude other persons from making, using, exercising, disposing or offering to di

such subject matter to the public by means of a patent application has the right to a monopoly for it." The Banks Report opted for the "whole contents" approac

equisite clear right or a right which, if not clear, has been  prima facie established though open to some doubt. Secondly, even if such a right has been established

pplication for a patent". Section 51  it was suggested "affords an objector the right and a means to oppose". This proposition is, with respect to the learned judge,

 subject to the provisions of this Act, for the duration of the patent, the right to exclude other persons from making, using, exercising, disposing or offering to dispose of

 However, I do not feel so convinced that my view of the matter is right that I feel obliged to dissent from the judgment of the majority. Dubita

ct itself. Section 51(1) gives an applicant for a patent or a patentee the right to apply��for an amendment of the relevant specification. Should there be opposition

22: "The proprietor can choose to assert design right in the whole or any part of his product. If the right is said to reside in the design of a teapot

sions of the Right of Appearance in Courts Act 62 of 1995. Section 34 of the Act provided that an attorney who has been granted the right of appearance in[

] the patent in the light of Dreyer, it sought to enforce its patent rights. Once again, the premise on which the argument is based has not been established

] the patent in the light of Dreyer, it sought to enforce its patent rights. Once again, the premise on which the argument is based has not been established

 get­up and the business associated therewith to the detriment of the applicant's rights. As a result the respondent's use of the STAR get­up is likely to give 

[1]] the market. Editor's Summary The first applicant was the owner of all the rights in and to the get­up of its "spirit cooler" beverages sold under the trade

 assign, make over or in any way encumber" its intellectual property rights. Whether the rights vested in Herbal Zone is neither here nor there. Once Infitech signed[[

ropean countries; (ii) the right to manufacture, sell and distribute spare parts for Lotus cars of whatever series and the exclusive right to describe itself as 'Lotus[

 sole right to distribute and sell the boats in Cape Town. The second applicant, represented by the first applicant, gave the first respondent such right without det

entation of a baker and the name Bakers in prominent black letters. On the right hand side, in light brown there is a representation of a scattering of Baker's[

equisite clear right or a right which, if not clear, has been  prima facie established though open to some doubt. Secondly, even if such a right has been established

22: "The proprietor can choose to assert design right in the whole or any part of his product. If the right is said to reside in the design of a teapot

ontinental approach emphasising the rights including moral rights of the author towards the to the Anglo­American model where commercial rights are dominant. He said: "The def

 as well as the nature of the rights possessed by the copyright owners. It argues that the Act creates exclusive rights in sound recordings for specific usage c

rst applicant would have agreed thereto had the right question been asked by an officious bystander at the right time (Strydom v Duvenhage NO en 'n ander1  1998[[5

laintiff's right to prevent the reproduction, adaptation of information contained in the plaintiff's fixture lists, among others.58  In balancing the rights afforded by the

broadcast of a given piece of music, viz the rights of the composer in relation to the broadcasting of his work, the rights of performers, and the owners of copyright[[1

ll SA 34 (SCA) proper interpretation of the licence agreements, first respondent's rights were not such as would entitle it to restrain the dealing by the first app

work vests the exclusive right in the owner to (amongst others) reproduce or publish the work. According to Dean: "The right to control the use of[[21

defendants from infringing its rights to copyright in the relevant films; (2) an order interdicting the defendants from infringing its rights to its trade mark(s); (3)

t. The holder of copyright in a literary work is vested with the exclusive right to reproduce the work in any manner or form. Copyright is infringed where any person

]] ­ Applicant had to establish a clear right by asking the court to make a final determination, firstly, of its rights of copyright in relation to its work, and

]] rights to do or to authorise without the latter's consent (section 23(1)). (Secondary infringement is not in issue and need not be discussed.) The exclusive rights of[

] appear at the top and which read vertically are tilted diagonally towards the right to make reading easier. The colour is white on green with black print. The