Member Vetting Process
Log In
About
Members
News
Awards
Contact
Member Vetting Process
Log In
Log In
Member Search
Specialism
Law Firm
Advisory Firm
Country
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Angola
Anguilla
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belgium
Belize
Bermuda
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
British Virgin Islands
Bulgaria
Cameroon
Canada
Cayman Islands
Chile
China
Colombia
Congo (Dem. Rep.)
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
Egypt
El Salvador
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Ghana
Gibraltar
Greece
Guatemala
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Israel
Italy
Japan
Jersey
Kenya
Korea (South)
Kosovo
Kuwait
Lebanon
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Macau
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malaysia
Malta
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mexico
Monaco
Morocco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Norway
Pakistan
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Republic of Ireland
Romania
Russia
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turks and Caicos Islands
UAE
Uganda
UK
Ukraine
Uruguay
US Virgin Islands
USA
Vietnam
Zimbabwe
Practice Area
Accountancy
Accounting and Tax
Acquisition Finance
Administrative
Admiralty
Agribusiness
AI
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Alternative Finance
Arbitration
Art
Asset Protection
Asset Protection Structures
Audit & Finance
Aviation
Banking & Finance
Bankruptcy
Broker Risk Management
Business
Business Formation
Business Immigration
Capital Markets
Citizenship
Citizenship by Descent
Civil
Civil Litigation
Civil Rights
Commercial
Commercial Arbitration
Commercial Contracts
Commercial Leasing
Commercial Litigation
Commercial Litigation
Commercial Real Estate
Commodities Trading
Commodity Disputes
Company
Company Formation
Competition
Compliance
Compliance & Regulatory
Construction
Contentious Probate
Contract
Copyright
Corporate
Corporate Accountant & VAT
Corporate Criminal
Corporate Finance
Corporate Governance
Corporate Immigration
Corporate Investment
Corporate Restructuring
Corporate Risk Management
Corporate Support Services
Corporate Tax
Costs
Criminal
Criminal Defence
Criminal Fraud
Cross Border Estates
Cross-Border
Cross-Border Transactions
Cultural Property
Customs Advisory
Data & Innovation
Data Privacy
Data Protection
Debt Collection
Debt Recovery
Defence & Security Procurement
Digital Transformation Consultancy
Dispute Resolution
Divorce
Due Diligence
Economic Criminal
Employment
Employment Litigation
Energy
Energy & Natural Resources
Environmental
ERISA & Employment Benefits
Estate Planning
European
Family
Fiduciary
Financial Services
Financial Services & Regulatory
Financial Transactions
FinTech
Fiscal
Foreign Direct Investments
Foreign Investments
Franchise
Fraud
Full Service
Gaming
Health & Safety
Healthcare
Healthcare M&A
Human Rights & Labour Rights
Immigration
India Desk
Industrial Relations
Information Technology
Infrastructure
Inheritance
Insolvency
Insurance
Insurance & Reinsurance
Insurance Litigation
Intellectual Property
International Arbitration
International Business
International Corporate
International Debt Collection
International Dispute Resolution
International Franchise
International Fraud
International Litigation
International Private
International Real Estate
International Tax
International Tax Planning
International Trade
International Trade & National Security
Investigations
Investment
IP Litigation
IT
Joint Ventures
Labour & Employment
Leasehold Enfranchisement
Legal Malpractice
Legal Risk Management
Life Science Patent
Life Sciences
Litigation
Litigation & Arbitration
M&A
Maritime
Matrimonial
Media & Entertainment
Mediation
Mediation & Arbitration
Medical Malpractice
Mining
Neuroradiology Expert Witness
New Technologies
Oil & Gas
Orthopaedic Expert Witness
Patent Litigation
Patents
Personal Injury
Personal Injury - Plaintiff
Pharmaceutical Sector Patents
Pharmaceuticals & Life Sciences
Private Client
Private Equity
Private Funds
Probate & Inheritance
Products
Project
Project Finance
Public Procurement
Real Estate
Real Estate - Property
Regulatory
Renewable Energy
Restructuring
SaaS/PaaS
Securities
Securities Litigation
Shipping & Admiralty
Shipping & Maritime
Shipping Finance
Sports
Start Up
Tax
Tax Litigation
Tax Planning
Tax Relocation
Tax Structures
Technology
TMT
Trademark
Transaction
Transfer Pricing
Transportation
Trust & Estates
Trust Administration
Venture Capital
Wealth & Estate Planning
Wealth Management
Wealth Planning
Whistleblower
White Collar Crime
Workers Compensation
Workplace Law & Investigations
Protection of Names in the Trademark Field
Published: Tuesday, July 26, 2016
Despite the apparent incompatibility between trademark and name, Peruvian law has regulated the possibility that a name be registered as a trademark.
In this respect, amongst the relative prohibitions to registration, Andean Decision 486: Common Regime on Industrial Property, provides under Article 136 (e) the following:
136. Those signs may not be registered as marks whose use in trade would unduly harm a third-party right, especially where:
(e) they consist of a sign that affects the identity or prestige of profit-making or non-profit-making legal entities, or natural persons, including especially the name, surname, signature, title, hypocoristic, pseudonym, likeness, portrait or caricature of a person other than the applicant or identified by the relevant sector of the public as a person other than the applicant, except where the consent of that person or, if he is deceased, that of those declared his heirs is proved.
The Peruvian Administrative Court identifies two scenarios in the above provision:
1.
The prohibition to register as trademark signs which consist of the name or surname (inter alia) of a person different from applicant, to the extent that said person’s identity or prestige is affected, except with the person’s consent or if deceased, of those who would have been declared the person’s heirs. This case operates when the name or surname which is intended to be registered as trademark does not identify a concrete person. The Court shall assess if the applied for sign affects the identity or prestige of the owner of the name or surname, which situation is unlikely, given the fact that the name in question does not identify a specific person.
2.
The prohibition to register as trademark signs which consist of the name or surname (inter alia) of a person identified by the pertinent sector of the public as a person different from applicant, insofar as there is affectation of the person’s identity or prestige, except with the person’s consent or if deceased, of those who would have been declared the person’s heirs.
This circumstance operates when the name or surname proposed to registration as a trademark is identified by the generality of the public in a
spontaneous, direct
and
immediate
manner, with a specific individual.
The Court shall evaluate if the sign applied for registration affects the identity or prestige of such specific person and if so determined, shall demand the person’s consent. The consent of a person which, by chance, possesses the same name or surname will have no relevance.
This prohibition applies even in the hypothetical where the applicant would have the name or surname which is intended to be registered as trademark. In this scenario, authorization should be obtained from the person who is identified with the name or surname in a
spontaneous, direct
and
immediate
fashion.
Two aspects developed by case law and which are not specifically regulated under Article 136 (e), are the following:
1.
Authorization from a foreign individual whose name is being applied for registration as a trademark will be required only if the name in question is identified by the generality of the national public in a spontaneous, direct and immediate manner with a specific individual different from applicant. The name must enjoy recognition and prestige in the country where protection is being claimed.
2.
When what is being applied for registration is only a forename, an authorization will not be necessary. This, due to the fact that use of a forename is not susceptible of being associated with a particular person.
Two different interests are taken into consideration in the Court’s overall analysis. On the one hand, the interest of the individual who can be recognized due to a special relation to the goods/services distinguished by the trademark. On the other hand, the interest of consumers, in relation to the particular goods/services.
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Alfredo Barreda
Barreda Moller
Country:
Peru
Practice Area:
Intellectual Property
Website:
www.barredamoller.com
Phone Number:
(511) 221-5715
Email:
mail@barredamoller.com
Fax:
(511) 441-1960
Education - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (Catholic University of Peru) - University of California Membership - President of the Peruvian Association of Industrial Property, 1999 – 2001 - Peruvian delegate of Inter American Association of Intellectual Property (ASIPI), 1994-2009 - International Federation of Intellectual Property Attorneys (FICPI) - International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) - European Communities Trade Mark Association (ECTA) - International Trademark Association (INTA) Languages Spanish and English Practice Areas - Trademark Law - Patent Law - Litigation - Unfair Competition Law - Advertising Legislation - Copyright Law - Licensing - Competition Law - Health Registrations - Domain Name
View Profile
Member Introduction
Brian D. O’Keefe
Lippitt O'Keefe Gornbein, PLLC
Michigan, USA
View Profile
Ruben Flores
FGA Attorneys & Advisors
Texas, USA
View Profile
Sherrie Boutwell
Boutwell Fay LLP
California, USA
View Profile
Gordon McAuley
Williams & Gumbiner LLP
California, USA
View Profile
The Lawyer Network in numbers
0
+
Members Firms
0
+
Countries
0
+
Practice Areas
0
+
Member Firms
Total Staff