Skip to content

CS Professional · Intellectual Property Rights - Law and Practice · Role of International Institutions

Rohan Pvt. Ltd., an Indian company, owns a mark registered in India. A competitor in another Paris Convention country argues that Rohan's mark cannot be registered there because it is not registered in India's home register of that country, and also that the mark's Indian registration lapsed. Which Paris Convention principle best supports Rohan on the argument that a mark's fate abroad is separate from its home registration?

The principle of independence of marks supports Rohan. Under the Paris Convention, a mark registered in a member country is independent of registrations in other countries, including the country of origin, so lapse of the Indian registration does not by itself defeat the foreign registration.

  1. AIndependence of marks: a mark registered in a member country is independent of registrations in other countries, including the country of originCorrect
  2. BPriority of marks: a mark is protected abroad for as long as it is protected in the country of origin
  3. CCompulsory licensing of marks across all member countries
  4. DAutomatic grant: a mark registered in one country is automatically registered in all

Explanation

Under the Paris Convention, a mark duly registered in one member country is regarded as independent of marks registered in other countries, including the country of origin. So lapse in India does not by itself end protection elsewhere. Priority only gives a filing-date advantage, and there is no automatic grant across members.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Role of International Institutions shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Role of International InstitutionsFree diagnostic mock

More Role of International Institutions questions