The leading national and international trade mark practitioners from around the world have been announced by the magazine World Trademark Review with the publication of the 2018 edition of the WTR 1000.
Matthew Harris, Partner at Waterfront IP Solicitors, is among the recommended leading trade mark experts in the WTR1000 2018 edition.
WTR 1000 recommends Matthew as follows:
“Matthew Harris deserves great credit for getting stuck into things that are good for the trademark profession as a whole”. The Waterfront Solicitors IP and IT dispute resolution chief is a thought leader when it comes to domain names“.
About WTR 1000
The WTR 1000 illustrates the depth of expertise available to brand owners as they seek to protect their brands. The guide serves as the definitive tool to locating the best trade mark partners worldwide.
The eighth edition of WTR 1000, further cements the guide’s reputation as the definitive directory exclusively dedicated to identifying the world’s leading trademark legal services providers. The WTR 1000 remains the only standalone publication to recommend individual practitioners and their firms exclusively in the trade mark field, and identifies the leading players in 70 key jurisdictions globally.
Individual practitioners, law firms and trade mark attorney practices qualify for inclusion in the WTR 1000 through receiving sufficient positive feedback from market sources. The research process is extensive, it is conducted over a four-month period by a team of full-time analysts and involves over 1500 face-to-face and telephone interviews with trade mark specialists across the globe. This research serves as a one-stop source of reference for anyone seeking trade mark legal services.
The current legal framework in the UK does not allow copying of copyright-protected material for training generative AI models, except where it is carried out with permission of the copyright owner or done in a research or study context and for purely non-commercial purposes.
This matter deals with the Claimant’s (‘TVIS’) allegation of infringement and misrepresentation in relation to its “VETSURE” trade mark by the Defendant (‘Howserv’s’) “PETSURE” trade mark, used for pet insurance. In the first instance decision, the claim was dismissed due to the marks being highly descriptive and “not…