AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P v. Lecours, Hebert Avocats Inc, 2017 FC 734
| Jurisdiction | Federal Jurisdiction (Canada) |
| Subject Matter | CRIMINAL LAW,PRACTICE,TORTS,EVIDENCE |
| Citation | 2017 FC 734 |
| Court | Federal Court (Canada) |
| Date | 31 July 2017 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
10 practice notes
-
Hilton Worldwide Holding LLP v. Miller Thomson, 2018 FC 895
...in the Act: see, for example TSA Stores, Orient-Express, and AT&T Intellectual Property II, LP v Lecours, Hébert Avocats Inc, 2017 FC 734 at para 14. (iii) The current version of the [78] The evidence from the Elford affidavit is that the 2006 version of the Manual did not include terms......
-
Extending Brand Protection To Canada
...will be encouraged by the Federal Court's recent decision in AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P v. Lecours, Hebert Avocats Inc., 2017 FC 734. In this case, AT&T was able to protect its brand and maintain its Canadian trademark registration for GO PHONE for use in association with te......
-
Trademarks: Use It Or Lose It And Prove It!
...use of the trade-mark is necessary to defeat a Section 45 challenge? In the case AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P v Lecours, Hebert, 2017 FC 734, the issue was whether AT&T had filed sufficient evidence showing use of the trade-mark, GO PHONE (the "Mark"). Services covered by the ......
-
Trademarks: Use it or lose it – and prove it!
...of use of the trade-mark is necessary to defeat a Section 45 challenge? In the case AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P v Lecours, Hebert, 2017 FC 734, the issue was whether AT&T had filed sufficient evidence showing use of the trade-mark, GO PHONE (the “Mark”). Services covered by the regis......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 cases
-
Hilton Worldwide Holding LLP v. Miller Thomson, 2018 FC 895
...in the Act: see, for example TSA Stores, Orient-Express, and AT&T Intellectual Property II, LP v Lecours, Hébert Avocats Inc, 2017 FC 734 at para 14. (iii) The current version of the [78] The evidence from the Elford affidavit is that the 2006 version of the Manual did not include terms......
9 firm's commentaries
-
Extending Brand Protection to Canada
...Court’s recent decision in AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P v. Lecours, Hebert Avocats Inc., 2017 FC 734. In this case, AT&T was able to protect its brand and maintain its Canadian trademark registration for GO PHONE for use in association with telecommunications services despite evidence......
-
Trademarks: Use it or lose it – and prove it!
...of use of the trade-mark is necessary to defeat a Section 45 challenge? In the case AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P v Lecours, Hebert, 2017 FC 734, the issue was whether AT&T had filed sufficient evidence showing use of the trade-mark, GO PHONE (the “Mark”). Services covered by the regis......
-
Extending Brand Protection To Canada
...will be encouraged by the Federal Court's recent decision in AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P v. Lecours, Hebert Avocats Inc., 2017 FC 734. In this case, AT&T was able to protect its brand and maintain its Canadian trademark registration for GO PHONE for use in association with te......
-
AT&T's GO PHONE Trademark Registration Saved by Roaming Services Offered in Canada
...The AT&T decision is a good reminder of this critical point. Case AT&T Intellectual Property II, LP v. Lecours, Hebert Advocats Inc., 2017 FC 734 IP Trademarks Summary AT&T owns a trademark registration for GO PHONE covering prepaid telecommunications services (including electronic transmis......
Request a trial to view additional results