-
Recent Posts
- New Law Memorandum on Designs in Israel
- W.L. Gore’s “GUARANTEED TO KEEP YOU DRY” trademark refused registration in Israel on absolute grounds
- Israel Supreme Court Decides that There is No Copyright in Teaching Methods
- Significant Patent Filing Fee Increase and Change at the Israeli Patent Office
- Holon Children’s Museum Found to be Infringing Copyrights
Categories
Search this blog
Category Archives: Israel
Israeli Supreme Court Discusses Damages in a Patent Case
The Israeli Supreme Court recently handed down a decision in Gideon Rotenberg v. Elgo Irrigation Ltd. et. al. and addressed section 183 to the Israeli Patent Act. Section 183 lists the remedies the plaintiff is entitled to should his suit succeed.
Tel Aviv District Court holds that photos of buildings constitute artistic work and determines ownership based on objective standards
The Tel Aviv District Court (Justice Avi Zamir) ruled January 5th, 2011 in the matter between Coral Tel Ltd. v. Bengal Net Ltd. The District Court held that photographs and videos of buildings showing various real estate projects in Israel and … Continue reading
Israeli Patent Office Releases Position on the Patentability of Software
The below is a free translation of the Israeli Patent Office position on the patentability of software inventions released December 30, 2010: Announcement To: Applicant’s, Patent Attorneys and Advocates From: Dr Meir Noam, Head of the Patent Office, Registrar of … Continue reading
KILLAH Held to Be Confusingly Similar to KILLY
By Dan Berg and Jonathan Agmon The applicant, European Sports Merchandising B.V. requested to register the trademark “KILLAH” in class 25. The applicant claims it is the owner of the “KILLAH” trademark worldwide and it is being used in connection … Continue reading
Posted in Israel, Opposition, Trademarks
ISRAEL: District Court: AMERICAN COLONY is a Well Known Trademark
The court concluded that the plaintiff proved that its unregistered mark had gained the status of a well known mark by fulfilling the obligatory requirement of proving its recognition is attributed to plaintiff’s marketing efforts. Continue reading


