The International Comparative Legal Guide to:

Trade Marks 2014

3rd Edition
A practical cross-border insight into trade mark work

Published by Global Legal Group, with contributions from:

AAA Law Odvetniki elih & partnerji, o.p., d.o.o.
Abreu Advogados OLIVARES
Advokatfirma Rder DA Ospelt & Partner Attorneys at Law Ltd.
Agency TRIA ROBIT Patrinos & Kilimiris
Allen & Overy LLP Pepeljugoski Consulting L.L.C.
Anderson Mori & Tomotsune Pepeljugoski Law Office
Andreas M. Sofocleous & Co LLC Pham & Associates
Baspinar & Partners Law Firm Quevedo & Ponce
Bereskin & Parr LLP Sotysiski Kawecki & Szlzak
Beuchat, Barros & Pfenniger Studio Legale Tsclex
Boga & Associates Subramaniam & Associates (SNA)
De Gaulle Fleurance & Associs SyCip Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan Law Offices
DM Kisch Inc. Tay & Partners
Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP ThomannFischer
ELZABURU TIPLO Attorneys-at-Law
Estudio Antequera Parilli & Rodrguez Vanrell Propiedad Intelectual Abogados
Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property Vasil Kisil & Partners
Hengeler Mueller Wilkinson & Grist
Lee International IP & Law Group Wilkinson & Grist (Beijing) Intellectual
Lendvai Partners Property Agency Limited
OConor Power-Abogados-Propiedad Industrial Wrays
The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Trade Marks 2014
General Chapter:
1 Trade Mark Law Shapes Up for the Thrust into the 21st Century John Olsen,
Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP 1

Country Question and Answer Chapters:

2 Albania Boga & Associates: Renata Leka & Ened Topi 5
Consulting Editor 3 Argentina OConor Power-Abogados-Propiedad Industrial: Santiago R. OConor
Paul Walsh, Bristows & Maria Silvina Ulens 13
Account Managers 4 Australia Wrays: David Stewart 20
Edmond Atta, Beth Bassett,
Antony Dine, Susan Glinska, 5 Brazil Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property: Laetitia dHanens
Dror Levy, Maria Lopez, & Fernando Eid Philipp 26
Florjan Osmani, Paul
Regan, Gordon Sambrooks, 6 Canada Bereskin & Parr LLP: Daniel R. Bereskin, Q.C. & Cynthia Rowden 36
Oliver Smith, Rory Smith
7 Chile Beuchat, Barros & Pfenniger: Andrs Melossi 44
Sales Support Manager
Toni Wyatt
8 China Wilkinson & Grist (Beijing) Intellectual Property Agency Limited:
Howard Tsang & Jean Wang 51
Sub Editors
Nicholas Catlin 9 Cyprus Andreas M. Sofocleous & Co LLC: Despo Socratous 59
Amy Hirst
10 Ecuador Quevedo & Ponce: Alejandro Ponce Martnez & Roque Albuja Izurieta 66
Editors
Beatriz Arroyo 11 European Union Allen & Overy LLP: Geert Glas & Dr. Jens Matthes 72
Gemma Bridge
12 France De Gaulle Fleurance & Associs: Frank Valentin & Marina Gau 81
Senior Editor
Suzie Kidd 13 Germany Hengeler Mueller: Dr. Wolfgang Kellenter & Dr. Andrea Schlaffge 90
Global Head of Sales 14 Greece Patrinos & Kilimiris: Maria Kilimiris & Manolis Metaxakis 98
Simon Lemos
15 Hong Kong Wilkinson & Grist: Andrea Fong & Annie Tsoi 106
Group Consulting Editor
Alan Falach
16 Hungary Lendvai Partners: Andrs Lendvai 114

Group Publisher 17 India Subramaniam & Associates (SNA): Hari Subramaniam

Richard Firth & Aditi Subramaniam 121
Published by 18 Italy Studio Legale Tsclex: Gianpaolo Todisco & Mark Bosshard 129
Global Legal Group Ltd.
59 Tanner Street 19 Japan Anderson Mori & Tomotsune: Yasufumi Shiroyama & Ai Nagaoka 136
London SE1 3PL, UK
20 Korea Lee International IP & Law Group: Mi-Cheong Lee & Michael McDaniel 143
Tel: +44 20 7367 0720
Fax: +44 20 7407 5255 21 Kosovo Pepeljugoski Consulting L.L.C.: Professor Dr. Valentin Pepeljugoski 150
Email: info@glgroup.co.uk
URL: www.glgroup.co.uk 22 Latvia Agency TRIA ROBIT: Vladimir Anohin & Alona Sivcova 158
GLG Cover Design 23 Liechtenstein Ospelt & Partner Attorneys at Law Ltd.: Dr. Alexander Ospelt
F&F Studio Design & Vladimir Good 165
GLG Cover Image Source 24 Lithuania AAA Law: Aura Paknien & Tomas Stanulionis 174
iStockphoto
25 Macedonia Pepeljugoski Law Office: Professor Dr. Valentin Pepeljugoski
Printed by
Information Press Ltd & Ana Pepeljugoska 181
May 2014 26 Malaysia Tay & Partners: Bee Yi Lim & Wee Liang Lim 192
Copyright 2014
Global Legal Group Ltd. 27 Mexico OLIVARES: Alonso Camargo & Daniel Sanchez 202
All rights reserved 28 Norway Advokatfirma Rder DA: Vebjrn Sndersrd & Trygve Martin Gravdahl 210
No photocopying
ISBN 978-1-908070-97-5 29 Philippines SyCip Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan Law Offices:
ISSN 2049-3118 Vida M. Panganiban-Alindogan & Enrique T. Manuel 218
Strategic Partners 30 Poland Sotysiski Kawecki & Szlzak: Dr. Ewa Skrzydo-Tefelska
& Karol Gajek 226
31 Portugal Abreu Advogados: Joo Veiga Gomes & Joo Gonalves Assuno 234
32 Slovenia Odvetniki elih & partnerji, o.p., d.o.o.: Luka Grasselli & Sanda abi 244
33 South Africa DM Kisch Inc.: Andrew Papadopoulos & Derek Momberg 252
34 Spain ELZABURU: Fernando Ilardia & Luis Baz 259
35 Switzerland ThomannFischer: Daniel Plss 269
Continued Overleaf

Further copies of this book and others in the series can be ordered from the publisher. Please call +44 20 7367 0720
Disclaimer
This publication is for general information purposes only. It does not purport to provide comprehensive full legal or other advice.
Global Legal Group Ltd. and the contributors accept no responsibility for losses that may arise from reliance upon information contained in this publication.
This publication is intended to give an indication of legal issues upon which you may need advice. Full legal advice should be taken from a qualified
professional when dealing with specific situations.

www.ICLG.co.uk
The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Trade Marks 2014
Country Question and Answer Chapters:
36 Taiwan TIPLO Attorneys-at-Law: J. K. Lin & H. G. Chen 276
37 Turkey Baspinar & Partners Law Firm: Gkmen Bapnar & Kaan Gk 287
38 Ukraine Vasil Kisil & Partners: Oleksandr Mamunya & Andrey Nikolayenko 295
39 United Kingdom Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP: John Olsen & Riecha Sharma 304
40 USA Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP: Lawrence R. Robins 314
41 Uruguay Vanrell Propiedad Intelectual Abogados: Juan Eduardo Vanrell 321
42 Venezuela Estudio Antequera Parilli & Rodrguez: Mara Alejandra Castillo 328
43 Vietnam Pham & Associates: Pham Vu Khanh Toan 334

EDITORIAL

Welcome to the third edition of The International Comparative Legal Guide to:
Trade Marks.
This guide provides corporate counsel and international practitioners with a
comprehensive worldwide legal analysis of trade mark laws and regulations.
It is divided into two main sections:
One general chapter entitled Trade Mark Law Shapes Up for the Thrust into the
21st Century.
Country question and answer chapters. These provide a broad overview of
common issues in trade mark laws and regulations in 42 jurisdictions.
All chapters are written by leading trade mark lawyers and industry specialists
and we are extremely grateful for their excellent contributions.
Special thanks are reserved for the consulting editor Paul Walsh of Bristows for
his invaluable assistance.
Global Legal Group hopes that you find this guide practical and interesting.
The International Comparative Legal Guide series is also available online at
www.iclg.co.uk.

Alan Falach LL.M.

Group Consulting Editor
Global Legal Group
Alan.Falach@glgroup.co.uk
 Chapter 5
Brazil
Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
1 Relevant Authorities and Legislation
1.1 What is the relevant Brazilian trade mark authority?
In Brazil, the relevant authority is the Brazilian Patent and
Trademark Office (BPTO) (INPI Instituto Nacional da
Propriedade Industrial, in Portuguese).
1.2 What is the relevant Brazilian trade mark legislation?
The relevant legislation is: (i) Law No. 9,279/96, the Industrial
Property Law; and (ii) Decrees Nos. 1,263/94 and 1355/94, which
ratified the Paris Convention and the TRIPS Agreement,
respectively.
2 Application for a Trade Mark
2.1 What can be registered as a trade mark?
According to Brazilian IP law, only distinctive, visually perceivable
and licit (not legally forbidden) signs are subject to be registered as
trademarks.
Such rules exclude from registration, for instance, musical or sound
marks, as well as smells and other non-traditional trademarks.
Nevertheless, 3D trademarks are allowed in Brazil.
Additionally, a sign can be registered as a trademark if the
additional requirements are fulfilled:
Availability: the sign must be available to be registered,
which means that it must not be the object of a third partys
legal prior right, to cover identical or akin products.
Veracity: the sign cannot be deceptive or mislead consumers.
Distinctiveness: the sign must be sufficiently distinctive in
order to clearly allow consumers to distinguish the
product/service from other identical or similar ones from a
different origin.
2.2 What cannot be registered as a trade mark?
Legal prohibitions regarding what cannot be registered as a
trademark are fairly extensive. However, the most frequent causes
of rejection of a trademark application are:
(i) the reproduction or imitation of previously registered
trademarks or a prior trade name belonging to a third party;
(ii) generic, descriptive and/or commonly used signs;
26 WWW.ICLG.CO.UK
Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Laetitia dHanens
Fernando Eid Philipp
(iii) signs that violate other prior rights (such as copyright or
industrial design) or moral and/or ethical principles; and
(iv) signs used as mere advertising (such as slogans).
It should be noted, however, that the legal prohibitions are much
broader, and include items such as single letters or numerals, coats of
arms, signals that could be offensive or immoral, personal names, etc.
2.3 What information is needed to register a trade mark?
Applications must include the trademark itself, the class in which
registration is intended, a description of the products/services, and
proof that such products/services are within the applicants field of
activity (bylaws or a declaration in this regard). Regarding
composite and/or figurative trademarks, the applicant may claim
the colours in case of interest.
Should the trademark application be filed based on a priority claim,
the priority number and documents should also be presented.
A power of attorney is also required (no notarisation or legalisation
is needed), should the application be filed by a representative, but
this may be filed up to 60 (sixty) days after the filing of the
application itself.
2.4 What is the general procedure for trade mark registration?
Following the filing of the application, the BPTO publishes the
trademark. If no oppositions are filed, the Institute analyses the
application and issues a formal decision through another
publication. Should such decision be favourable, the applicant must
pay the appropriate taxes and the registration is granted. In the
event of a decision of rejection, the applicant may file an appeal,
which will be evaluated by the BPTO and may or may not result in
the reversion of such decision.
2.5 How can a trade mark be adequately graphically
represented?
While filing an application for a figurative and/or composite
trademark, the graphic (device) elements must be duly classified
according to the International Classification of Figurative Elements.
Should the trademark include claiming of colours, there are two
possibilities:
filing the application with a coloured logo; or
filing the application in black and white, indicating the
claimed colours within the image file.
ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014
Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
2.6 How are goods and services described?
The goods and services covered by the trademark must be clearly
described in the application form, following the Nice International
Classification system (NCL). Since this system is merely a
guideline, it is possible to cover products or services not contained
in the NCL list, as long as they are directly related to the class of
interest.
In any case, the whole class cannot be generically claimed as all
goods in class....
Finally, the BPTO does not allow generic/broad descriptions of
goods or services, which is the reason why in some cases the class
headings are not accepted (when they are too broad).
2.7 What territories (including dependents, colonies, etc.) are
or can be covered by a Brazilian trade mark?
Brazilian trademark registrations are only effective within Brazilian
territory.
2.8 Who can own a Brazilian trade mark?
Both companies (private or public) and natural persons can own a
trademark registration, as long as the owner is effectively engaged
in the activities indicated by it. Companies must be registered
before the competent authority. A natural person must present proof
of engagement and/or specific allowance for the performance of the
related activities.
2.9 Can a trade mark acquire distinctive character through
use?
Although (i) the Paris Convention and the TRIPs agreement are to
be considered as applicable legislation within Brazilian territory,
(ii) the understanding of the IP scholars is for the protection of a
trademark that acquired distinctiveness through use, and (iii)
Brazilian courts have been recognising this protection in some
cases, the BPTO is very restrictive in accepting the secondary
meaning of an unregistered trademark throughout the registration
procedure.
In this sense, it has been indeed necessary filing a lawsuit before the
Brazilian court in order to have protection of an unregistered
trademark that eventually acquired distinctiveness through use.
Additionally, to have the secondary meaning duly recognised, it is
necessary to present consistent evidence showing that the trademark
acquired distinctive character, allowing consumers to distinguish
the product/service covered by it from other identical or similar
ones from a different origin.
2.10 How long on average does registration take?
A smooth registration procedure takes approximately three years.
However, in the case of opposition filed by third parties or office
actions issued by the BPTO, it can take five years or more.
2.11 What is the average cost of obtaining a Brazilian trade
mark?
The average cost of obtaining a Brazilian trademark registration
includes the following official fees:
Filing fees for one trademark application in one class: USD
238.50.
ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014
Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Brazil
Issuance of Registration Certificate registration fees: USD
335.25.
Renewal fees (for a 10-year period): USD 479.25.
2.12 Is there more than one route to obtaining a registration in
Brazil?
Brazil
No, the only route for registration of a trademark is by filing an
application before the BPTO.
2.13 Is a Power of Attorney needed?
Yes. A Power of Attorney (POA) is indeed required whenever a
trademark application is filed by someone other than the companys
legal representatives (according to their bylaws), otherwise the
application will be filed away by the BPTO. It may, however, be
filed up to 60 days after the application filing date.
Regarding foreign applicants in particular, the POA must expressly
include powers to receive judicial summons, otherwise the
application may be dismissed (or registration may be revoked) by
the BPTO.
2.14 How is priority claimed?
In order to claim a priority, the applicant must include the priority
data in the application form, along with a certified copy of the
priority document (issued by the local PTO for which priority is
claimed). Also, the priority document may be filed later, within
four months counted from the filing date.
2.15 Does Brazil recognise Collective or Certification marks?
Yes, provided some legal requirements are met, both Collective and
Certification marks are allowed. For Collective marks, application
must be instructed with the collective rules applying to the use of
the trademark. For Certification marks, application must be
instructed with all characteristics of the certified product/service, as
well as the control measures to be applied for granting the
certification. In both cases, documents fulfilling those requirements
may be filed up to 60 days after the filing of the application.
3 Absolute Grounds for Refusal
3.1 What are the absolute grounds for refusal of registration?
The absolute grounds for refusal of a trademark registration, which
are predicted in article 124 of Brazilian IP Law, are mainly:
the lack of distinctiveness;
a sign that is a reproduction or imitation of titles, bonds,
coins and bank notes;
a sign that is contrary to the moral and public order;
signs or expressions (slogans) used only as a means of
advertising;
duality of marks owned by the same owner, designating the
same product or service;
a sign that is composed of coats of arms, armoury, medals,
flags, badges and official monuments, either national,
international or foreign, as well as their imitations or
references;
signs which may induce errors regarding the origin, nature,
quality or utility of the designated products or services;
WWW.ICLG.CO.UK 27
 Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
reproduction or imitation of official seals, usually adopted to
certify compliance to a certain standard of any kind or
nature;
geographic indications, imitations thereof which are likely to
cause confusion, or signs that might falsely suggest a
geographic indication;
colours and their names, except when arranged or combined
Brazil
in an unusual and distinctive manner;
technical terms used in industry, science or art that are related
to the product or service to be distinguished; and
necessary, common or usual shapes of a product or of its
packaging, or, furthermore, shapes that cannot be
disassociated from a technical effect.
3.2 What are the ways to overcome an absolute grounds
objection?
Although the prohibitions above are in principle absolute and
therefore would not be subject to be overcome, some of them can
be reverted if the owner of the mark is able to prove, for example,
that:
a) the sign is sufficiently distinctive; and
b) the sign is not used as a means of advertising, exercising
distinctive function as a mark, etc., among others.
3.3 What is the right of appeal from a decision of refusal of
registration from the Intellectual Property Office?
The Rejection Decision issued by the BPTO is subject to an appeal,
which may be filed within 60 days from the publication of such
decision. Should such appeal be rejected by the BPTO, a lawsuit
may still be filed before the Brazilian courts to reverse the
administrative rejection.
3.4 What is the route of appeal?
Once an appeal is filed, it will be published in the BPTOs official
gazette, and any interested third party may file a response (within
60 days counted from the publication). Afterwards, it will be
examined by the BPTOs President (who in fact delegates the exam
to the BPTOs Board of General Coordination of Appeals and
Administrative Annulment Procedures).
If the appeal is denied, the rejection decision will be maintained and
no further measure will be possible in the administrative procedure.
To contest this final administrative decision, it is necessary to file a
lawsuit before the Brazilian courts seeking its reversion.
4 Relative Grounds for Refusal
4.1 What are the relative grounds for refusal of registration?
As for the relative grounds for refusal of a trademark registration,
which are also predicted in article 124 of Brazilian IP Law, in Brazil
they are usually related to the violation of a third-party right.
In this sense, the relative grounds for refusal are:
reproductions or imitations, in whole or in part, even with
additions, of a mark registered by a third party to distinguish
or certify a product or service that is identical or similar to,
and which is likely to cause confusion or association with,
the third partys mark;
objects that are protected by industrial design registrations in
the name of third parties;
28 WWW.ICLG.CO.UK
Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Brazil
signs that imitate or reproduce, wholly or in part, a mark of
which the applicant could obviously not fail to have
knowledge in view of his activity, and of which the
proprietor is established or domiciled in the national territory
or in a country with which Brazil maintains an agreement or
guarantees reciprocity of treatment, if the mark is intended to
distinguish a product or service that is identical or similar to,
and is likely to cause confusion or association with such third
party mark;
reproductions or imitations of a characteristic or distinctive
element of a title of establishment or the trade name
belonging to a third party;
reproductions or imitations of signs that have been registered
as a collective or a certification mark by a third party;
names, prizes or symbols of sporting, artistic, cultural, social,
political, economic or technical official or officially
recognised events, as well as imitations likely to cause
confusion, except when authorised by the competent
authority or entity promoting the event;
personal names or signatures thereof, family or patronymic
names and images of third parties, except with the consent of
the owner, his heirs or his successors; and
literary, artistic or scientific works, as well as titles protected
by copyright and likely to cause confusion or association,
except with the consent of the author or owner.
4.2 Are there ways to overcome a relative grounds objection?
Yes, there are. As examples we may quote:
a difference between the sign and the goods/services
identified by it;
a sufficiently distinctive form of the mark;
a difference between the goods/services identified by the
marks;
use of the sign as a mark and not only as a means of
advertising; and
authorisation to register a third party or patronymic name, or
a right protected by author right, among others.
4.3 What is the right of appeal from a decision of refusal of
registration from the Intellectual Property Office?
Please refer to question 3.3 above.
4.4 What is the route of appeal?
Please refer to question 3.4 above.
5 Opposition
5.1 On what grounds can a trade mark be opposed?
It is possible to file an opposition against a third party trademark
application based on all hypotheses set forth in article 124 of the IP
Law, as well as in the Paris Convention, which states the absolute
and relative grounds of refusal of a trademark. Also, the opposition
can be grounded on the notoriety and highly renowned status of a
trademark, as well as on article 129, 1, which is an exception that
provides that every person who, in good faith on the filing date, has
been using an identical or similar mark to identify an identical or
similar product/service, shall have the right of preference for the
registration. In this case, the interested party would also have to file
a TM application for the intended mark.
ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014
Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
It is also possible to oppose a trademark application on the grounds
of unfair competition, as stated in article 2, Item V, of the IP Law,
which states that repressing unfair competition is one of the main
objectives of the Law itself. The protection against actions such as
the unlawful appropriation of clientele is always a strong argument
in oppositions and other manifestations before the BPTO.
5.2 Who can oppose the registration of a Brazil trade mark?
Any interested party can oppose a trademark application in Brazil,
since there is no legal restriction on who is entitled to do so.
Oppositions filed based on prior rights, for example, can be filed by
the owner of such trademarks or any other interested third party
expressly allowed to enforce such rights (e.g. licensee) that may cite
these prior rights as obstacles for the registration of the opposed
trademark application. Also, any third party is allowed to file an
opposition based on absolute grounds for refusal.
In fact the only necessary requirements required by the BPTO are
the presentation of the Power of Attorney, payment of the official
fees and compliance with the 60-day term.
5.3 What is the procedure for opposition?
An opposition is a petition that can be presented by any interested
party within 60 days, counted from the publication date of the
trademark application. After the publication in the Official
Gazette of the notice of opposition, the owner of the opposed
trademark application will have a 60-day term to file a response,
which is not mandatory. It is important to highlight that the
BPTO will render a decision taking into consideration not only
possible oppositions but also any other obstacle or statutory
prohibition ex officio.
A decision regarding an opposition duly filed takes approximately
five years to be rendered by the examiner.
6 Registration
6.1 What happens when a trade mark is granted registration?
When a trademark registration is allowed, the BPTO publishes such
decision in the Official Gazette, opening a 60-day term for the
applicant to proceed with the payment of the final fees, which will
lead to the issuance of the Certificate and the 10-year term of
protection for the trademark. Once these fees are paid, the BPTO
publishes the final granting decision of the trademark registration,
issuing the Certificate of Registration and forwarding it to the
applicants legal representative within approximately six months.
The applicant can still proceed with the payment of such official
fees on an extraordinary period [30-day term] by paying extra fees.
If after this period the official fees still have not been paid, the
trademark application is definitely filed away.
6.2 From which date following application do an applicants
trade mark rights commence?
In accordance with Brazilian IP Law, the property of a mark is
acquired by means of registration. Therefore, while a trademark is
still an application, the owner of such trademark has only the
expectation to acquire such right, and precedence on a first to file
analysis as from the filing/priority date.
Nevertheless, article 130, III, of the IP Law also states that the
titleholder of a mark or the applicant is further assured the right to
ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014
Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Brazil
safeguard its material integrity or reputation, assuring the
titleholder of the non-registered trademark the right to protect the
respective sign. In this sense, in case of infringement of a trademark
as an unfair competition practice, as a general rule, the harmed
applicant is entitled to seek protection as from the filing date.
Brazil
6.3 What is the term of a trade mark?
A trademark registration is valid for a period of 10 (ten) years,
which can be successively renewed for identical consecutive
periods.
6.4 How is a trade mark renewed?
A trademark is renewed through a renewal application and payment
of an official fee in the amount of USD 479.25. Such fee can be
paid during the last year that the trademark is in force (ninth year)
and in case of non-compliance with this period, the BPTO grants an
extended period of six months, counted from the expiration date of
the regular term. No justification is needed in order to renew the
trademark registration under the extended period, but it is necessary
to pay extra fees in the amount of USD 724.50.
After the renewal request and payment of such fees, the registration
renewal is published in the BPTOs Official Gazette.
7 Registrable Transactions
7.1 Can an individual register the assignment of a trade
mark?
Yes, an individual can register the assignment of a mark before the
BPTO. It is necessary to:
present a copy of the assignment executed between the
parties (no need of legalisation), signed by two witnesses, as
well as its simple translation into Portuguese (if applicable);
prove that the legal representatives of the parties are duly
empowered to represent the assignor and to execute the
assignment document; and
present an affidavit or a copy of an official document
(bylaws) proving that the assignee is engaged in the activities
covered by the marks.
7.2 Are there different types of assignment?
There are no different types of assignments, and the important point
of an assignment is that it must include all the registrations or
applications in the name of the assignor, for the same or similar
marks related to an identical or similar product or service, under
penalty of having the non-assigned registrations cancelled or the
non-assigned applications shelved.
7.3 Can an individual register the licensing of a trade mark?
Yes, an individual can register the licensing of a trademark. The
registration of a licence is necessary to enable the licensee settled in
Brazil to remit royalties (if any) abroad, to benefit from tax
deduction of such royalties and to oppose the licence to third
parties. Nevertheless, in case of a cancellation action for non-use,
the recordation of the licence is not necessary to allow a licensees
proof of use of the trademark as regular evidence of use.
WWW.ICLG.CO.UK 29
 Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
7.4 Are there different types of licence?
The Brazilian IP Law accepts sub-licences and exclusive or non-
exclusive licences as well.
7.5 Can a trade mark licensee sue for infringement?
Brazil
If such provision is stated in the trademark licence agreement duly
registered before the BPTO, it is indeed possible to sue for
infringement. According to article 139, sole paragraph of the
Brazilian IP Law, the licensee can be invested by the titleholder
with powers to defend the mark.
7.6 Are quality control clauses necessary in a licence?
No, quality control clauses are not necessary in a licence, and the
absence of such clauses does not lead to any administrative risk to
the licensed trademark. Nevertheless, the insertion of such clauses
might be advisable in order to protect the trademark reputation and
the rights of the licensor.
7.7 Can an individual register a security interest under a trade
mark?
In accordance to article 136, II, of the IP Law, yes an individual can
register a security interest against a TM application or registration.
In order to proceed with this recordal it is necessary to present a
Power of Attorney for the owner of the mark and a certified copy of
the security interest agreement.
7.8 Are there different types of security interest?
Considering that the BPTO does not put limitations in this regard,
there are different types of security interests accorded by the parties
and all of them are valid and acceptable.
8 Revocation
8.1 What are the grounds for revocation of a trade mark?
A trademark can be revoked in Brazil by the following grounds:
a) Renunciation: the applicant may request the full or partial
renunciation of the goods or services identified by the
trademark.
b) For the lack of a qualified and domiciled representative in
Brazil with powers to receive summons, in accordance with
article 217 of Brazil IP Law.
c) For the lack of use of a trademark: a trademark can be subject
to cancellation due to its non-use after five years of the
granting of its registration and if:
the use of the mark has not been initiated in Brazil; or
the use of the mark has been discontinued for more
than five consecutive years, or if, within that period,
the mark has been used with modifications involving
the alteration of its original distinctive character, as
shown in the certificate of registration.
It is important to highlight that (i) there will be no cancellation of
the trademark registration if the owner is capable of justifying its
lack of use by legitimate reasons, and (ii) the partial revocation of a
trademark is also possible if the mark has been in use for only some
of the goods/services that it identifies.
30 WWW.ICLG.CO.UK
Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Brazil
8.2 What is the procedure for revocation of a trade mark?
If the trademark is subject to a non-use cancellation action, any
legitimate interested party must file a petition before the BPTO
requesting the forfeiture of such registration. The BPTO will
publish the notice of a non-use cancellation action request in the
Official Gazette, opening a 60-day term for the owner of the
registration to prove the use of the mark or justify its non-use for
legitimate reasons during the investigative period, which comprises
the five years immediately prior to the date when the non-use
cancellation action request was filed. Such response by the owner
is mandatory (otherwise the registration will be cancelled). After
filing a response, the BPTO will analyse the arguments and
documents presented and will render a decision granting or
rejecting the forfeiture request. Its decision will also be published
in the Official Gazette, opening another 60 (sixty) day term for the
parties to file appeals (please see question 8.5).
8.3 Who can commence revocation proceedings?
Revocation proceedings can be commenced by any interested party
who can justify its legitimate interest in such action. It is
considered a legitimate interest if (i) the commencer is a competitor
of the owner who owns the registration and intends to use that same
TM in the same or a similar branch of activity, or (ii) the
commencer owns another conflicting right.
8.4 What grounds of defence can be raised to a revocation
action?
The grounds of defence that can be raised are: (a) the justification
of the lack of use of a trademark by legitimate reasons, which are
those that present themselves as irresistible or inevitable (e.g.: force
majeure causes; inexistence of raw material; causes that prevent the
manufacture of certain products; natural disasters; etc.); and (b)
demonstration of the continued use of the trademark as it was
originally granted. This means that the examiner will verify: (i) if
the use was effective and consistent (in accordance with the product
nature), since it cannot be eventual or sporadic; (ii) the reliability of
the documents presented, which must be dated and cover the
investigative period (e.g. debit notes, packages, catalogues, ad
material, etc.); and (iii) in case of composite or figurative
trademarks, if the trademark registration has suffered some
essential alteration of its distinctive character.
8.5 What is the route of appeal from a decision of revocation?
As explained in question 8.3 above, it is possible to present an
appeal to the decision rendered by the BPTO which granted or
rejected the forfeiture request. Such appeal will be analysed by the
BPTO President and a final decision will be rendered.
Should such appeal be rejected by the BPTO, a judicial lawsuit may
be filed before the Brazilian court.
9 Invalidity
9.1 What are the grounds for invalidity of a trade mark?
Invalidity can be based on either absolute or relative grounds.
Besides the grounds described in questions 3.1 and 4.1 above, any
relative ground can be sustained for invalidity of a trademark,
except for the preference right which, according to the BPTOs
ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014
Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
current understanding, is only acceptable in the course of
examination procedure (opposition).
Also, the absolute grounds for invalidity of a trademark are: (a) the
well-known status of a conflicting trademark (article 126 of IP Law
and article 6bis of the Paris Convention); and (b) highly renowned
reputation of a prior registered conflicting trademark (article 125 of
the IP Law).
9.2 What is the procedure for invalidation of a trade mark?
The invalidation of a trademark procedure can be made through an
Administrative Nullity Action, which can be filed once the
registration of a trademark is granted. The interested party will
have 180 days, counted from the publication of the granting
decision date, to take this measure.
This action is published in the Official Gazette for the owner of the
registration to present the manifestation (optional). This Nullity
Action will be analysed by the BPTOs President and Board and its
decision regarding the cancellation of the registration will be
published in the Official Gazette. Such decision will only be able
to be challenged before the Brazilian Federal Courts through a
nullity action, which must be filed within five years from the
granting of the registration date.
9.3 Who can commence invalidation proceedings?
Any interested party (inclusively the BPTO ex officio) can
commence invalidation proceedings, since there is no delimitation
to who is entitled to do so. Administrative Nullity Actions filed
based on prior rights, for example, can be filed by the owner of such
trademarks or any other party that may cite these prior rights as
obstacles for the registration of the challenged trademark
registration.
9.4 What grounds of defence can be raised to an invalidation
action?
Please refer to question 4.2, since the same grounds of defence can
be raised to an invalidation action. If the argumentation is based on
bad faith, such claim can be rebutted based on several arguments,
such as the prior use of the mark, the prior use of the mark as a
family name or a commercial, etc.
9.5 What is the route of appeal from a decision of invalidity?
As highlighted in question 9.2 there is no route of appeal for a
decision of invalidity. The feasible measure to be taken in this case
would be filing a court action.
10 Trade Mark Enforcement
10.1 How and before what tribunals can a trade mark be
enforced against an infringer?
In Brazil claims for infringement must be brought before State
Courts, while validity claims shall be filed before Federal Courts.
As a general rule, an infringement claim shall be brought before the
respective State Court of the defendants residence or headquarters,
or before the State Court where the infringing act was carried out.
ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014
Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Brazil
10.2 What are the pre-trial procedural stages and how long
does it generally take for proceedings to reach trial from
commencement?
According to the Brazilian Procedural Code, the main stages
observed in a lawsuit from commencement to trial are the
following:
Brazil
(i) the plaintiff files its initial complaint before court;
(ii) the judge examines whether all of the formal requirements
have been met and, if so, determines the summoning of the
defendant. At this stage, the judge can also decide an
eventual preliminary injunction request;
(iii) once the defendant is summoned, and the respective letter of
summons is attached to the case records, the defendant has,
in general, 15 days to present its defence;
(iv) depending on the arguments raised by the defendant, the
judge may grant five to 10 days to the plaintiff to present a
reply;
(v) after the reply, the judge will establish the controversial
points of the lawsuit and assess the necessity of further
evidence before trial;
(vi) if the evidence presented by the parties is understood to be
sufficient by the judge, the parties may have the opportunity
to file their final briefs and the case will then reach trial;
(vii) if, on the other hand, the judge understands that more
evidence is necessary, the parties will be notified to specify
what sorts of evidence they wish to present (oral, written,
witness, expert, among others);
(viii) the parties will then present said evidence and each party will
have the opportunity to contest the new evidence presented
by the other;
(ix) in case an expert opinion is requested by the parties and
accepted by the judge, an expert will be nominated by the
judge and the parties will be notified to present their queries
and indicate their technical assistants. After the expert
opinion is presented, each party may present its arguments,
together with its technical assistants arguments, concerning
the opinion;
(x) once this evidentiary phase is over, the parties may then
present their final briefs and the case will reach trial; and
(xi) a final decision on the merits will be rendered by the judge.
The amount of time that proceedings can take, from
commencement to trial, varies on a case-by-case basis according to
the complexity of the case, the court, the necessity for expert
opinion, among others. Nevertheless, in general, proceedings often
take between 12-24 months.
10.3 Are (i) preliminary and (ii) final injunctions available and if
so on what basis in each case?
Both injunctions are available under Brazilian Law.
Concerning the preliminary injunction, two conditions must be
simultaneously met for its granting, according to article 273 of the
Brazilian Procedural Code:
(i) The first one relates to the existence of unequivocal evidence
regarding the facts and grounds that are being argued in the
initial complaint: the judge must be convinced of the veracity
of the facts and grounds alleged by the plaintiff.
(ii) The second one refers to the real urgency of the matter: it
must be assessed if the rejection of the preliminary injunction
request could possibly cause serious or imminent damages to
the plaintiff. This, however, must be weighed against the
possible damages to be caused to the defendant in case such
injunction is granted.
WWW.ICLG.CO.UK 31
 Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
As for a final injunction, it is often granted when the judge is
convinced of the infringement or invalidity of a right when deciding
the merits of the lawsuit and understands that the continuation of
certain practices may cause irreparable damages to the plaintiff. In
situations like this, the judge may establish that an appeal will not
suspend the effects of its merits decision.
Brazil
10.4 Can a party be compelled to provide disclosure of
relevant documents or materials to its adversary and if so
how?
Under the civil law system followed by Brazil, there is no
discovery proceeding, so the parties are generally not compelled
to disclose any sort of documents or materials. However,
depending on the circumstances of the case, the judge may
establish the seizure of any materials, documents or data to be
used as evidence later in the lawsuit.
10.5 Are submissions or evidence presented in writing or orally
and is there any potential for cross-examination of
witnesses?
The Brazilian Procedural Code provides for various types of
evidence, including documents, oral depositions (parties and
witnesses), expert opinions, etc. With regard specifically to
witnesses statements, this is generally done in a hearing, in which
not only the judge but also the other partys attorney may question
the witnesses. Nonetheless, witnesses statements can also be
provided in writing.
10.6 Can infringement proceedings be stayed pending
resolution of validity in another court or the Intellectual
Property Office?
An infringement claim can be stayed due to a pending validity
claim brought before a different court. This may be verified when
the resolution of the validity claim may directly affect the resolution
of the infringement claim and, in general, when the validity
proceeding was filed before the infringement one.
If, however, the validity of an IP right is being discussed before the
Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO), the suspension of
an infringement claim will not be mandatory, given that the
Brazilian Procedural Code provides that only a judicial action can
suspend another action.
This suspension may be requested by any of the parties or it can be
determined by the judge ex officio.
10.7 After what period is a claim for trade mark infringement
time-barred?
The general rule is that a trademark infringement claim must be
brought up within five years of the infringing act, otherwise such
claim can be declared extinct.
10.8 Are there criminal liabilities for trade mark infringement?
According to articles 189 and 190 of the Brazilian Industrial
Property Law (Law no. 9.279/96), a crime against a trademark
registration is practised by anyone who:
(i) reproduces a registered mark, in whole or in part, without
authorisation of the titleholder, or imitates it in a manner that
may induce confusion;
32 WWW.ICLG.CO.UK
Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Brazil
(ii) alters the registered mark of a third party already applied to
a product placed on the market; and
(iii) imports, exports, sells, offers or displays for sale, conceals or
has in stock (a) a product bearing a mark illegally reproduced
or imitated, in whole or in part, of a third party, or (b) a
product of his own industry or commerce, held in a vessel,
container or package that contains the legitimate mark of a
third party.
The penalties for such criminal practices are either imprisonment,
from one to three months, or payment of a fine.
In the case of imprisonment, the terms can be increased by one-third
to one-half if the crime is perpetrated by a representative, proxy,
agent, partner or employee of the titleholder, or if the trademark that
has been altered, reproduced, or imitated is famous, well-known or is
a certification or collective mark (article 196 of the Brazilian IP Law).
The fine, on the other hand, shall be set at a minimum of 10 and a
maximum of 360 daily fines, which can be reduced or increased by as
many as 10 times in view of the personal situation of the agent and the
size of the advantage obtained (article 197 of the Brazilian IP Law).
10.9 If so, who can pursue a criminal prosecution?
Criminal prosecution can be pursued exclusively by the titleholder
or by the licensee when the Trade Mark Licence Agreement has
been recorded with the BPTO. The only criminal action that shall
be considered public and pursued by the State refers to crimes in
which coats of arms, escutcheons or national, foreign and
international official badges have been reproduced or imitated
without the necessary authorisation.
10.10 What, if any, are the provisions for unauthorised threats
of trade mark infringement?
Brazilian IP Law does not provide for any regulations on
unauthorised threats of trademarks.
11 Defences to Infringement
11.1 What grounds of defence can be raised by way of non-
infringement to a claim of trade mark infringement?
Article 132 of the Brazilian IP Law expressly provides for certain
exceptions which may be raised as non-infringement to a claim of
trademark infringement, which are:
(i) the use, by traders and distributors, of their own distinctive
signs along with the mark of the product, in its promotion
and commercialisation;
(ii) the use of a mark by manufacturers of accessories to indicate
the purpose of the product, provided that fair competition
practices are followed;
(iii) the free-circulation of a product placed on the domestic
market by the titleholder himself, or by another with his
consent; and
(iv) the mentioning of a mark in a speech, scientific or literary
work, or in any other publications, provided it is done
without commercial connotation and without detriment to its
distinctive character.
As a means of defence in an infringement claim it can also be
argued the invalidity of the plaintiffs right, which may be taken
into account by the judge in order to reject the infringement claim
or even in order to declare the nullity of such right between the
parties. It is important to highlight, however, that a nullity
ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014
Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
declaration on an infringement claim affects solely the parties of the
lawsuit, given that for an IP right to be considered null before the
general public, its invalidity must be declared by a Federal Court in
an action claiming a declaratory judgment in this regard, or by the
BPTO in an invalidity administrative procedure.
11.2 What grounds of defence can be raised in addition to
non-infringement?
As a means of defence in an infringement claim the invalidity of the
plaintiffs right can also be argued, which may be taken into
account by the judge in order to reject the infringement claim or
even in order to declare the nullity of such right between the parties.
It is important to highlight, however, that a nullity declaration on an
infringement claim affects solely the parties of the lawsuit, given
that for an IP right to be considered null before the general public,
its invalidity must be declared by a Federal Court in an action
claiming a declaratory judgment in this regard, or by the BPTO in
an invalidity administrative procedure.
Moreover, the use of a trademark in comparative advertising, as
long as it is objective and does not harm the reputation of the mark
and its owner, has been accepted by Brazilian scholars and judges
lately as a mean of defence in infringement claims.
Also, the laches doctrine may be another ground of defence, as long
as it can be proven that the plaintiff was aware of the infringement
and did not, for a long time, take any measures to cease such
infringement.
12 Relief
12.1 What remedies are available for trade mark infringement?
The main remedies available for a trademark infringement are:
(i) damages;
(ii) search and seizure of counterfeited goods;
(iii) partial recovery of the costs and expenses with the lawsuit; and
(iv) preliminary and final injunctions.
12.2 Are costs recoverable from the losing party and if so what
proportion of the actual expense can be recovered?
The concept of costs may encompass the expenses with the lawsuit
(taxes, expert fees, etc.) and the parties attorneys fees. The
expenses are fully recoverable by the winning party. The attorneys
fees, on the other hand, are paid by the losing party on the proportion
of 10 to 20% of the value of the judicial action, a proportion which
must be decided by the judge based on the complexity of the case,
how much work was done by the attorneys, etc.
13 Appeal
13.1 What is the right of appeal from a first instance judgment
and is it only on a point of law?
As a general rule, an appeal can always be filed by any of the parties
to discuss the decision on the merits rendered by the first instance
judge, with the sole limitation that the arguments raised on the
appeal must have already been brought to the lawsuit before the
decision on the merits was rendered (exceptions are listed in
question 13.2).
ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014
Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Brazil
The right to appeal may not be exercised, though, in cases in which
the decision on the merits was rendered in accordance with judicial
consolidated precedents from the Supreme Federal Court or the
Superior Court of Justice.
Once the appeal is decided by a State Court of Appeals (in
infringement cases) or by a Federal Court of Appeals (in invalidity
cases), a new appeal can be filed before the Superior Court of
Brazil
Justice and/or the Supreme Federal Court, but only to question the
interpretation of federal law or constitutional matters, respectively.
13.2 In what circumstances can new evidence be added at the
appeal stage?
According to article 517 of the Brazilian Procedural Code, new
evidences can be added at the appeal stage only if they were not
presented during the first instance proceeding due to force majure.
Brazilian scholars consider force majure the following
circumstances:
(i) new facts, i.e. facts that occurred after the decision on the
merits was rendered;
(ii) the party was not aware of the fact due to serious and
objective reasons;
(iii) the party was not allowed to disclose the fact to its lawyer
due to objective obstacles; and
(iv) the partys attorney was not allowed to disclose the fact
before court due to objective obstacles.
14 Border Control Measures
14.1 What is the mechanism for seizing or preventing the
importation of infringing goods or services and if so how
quickly are such measures resolved?
The Brazilian Customs Legal System does not yet provide for a
formal procedure in which the titleholder can register its trademark
to request seizure, or for a recordation system similar to the US
and Europe. In this sense, in order to prevent the importation of
infringing goods and to obtain the seizure of these goods by
Customs, it is important that the trademark owner proves his/her
ownership over a specific trademark, as well as provides Customs
officers in each of the most important ports and airports with
information about the legitimate product, in order to enable them to
recognise the counterfeited ones.
Once able to identify the counterfeited products, Customs may
seize them ex officio or upon request by the trademark owner.
If the goods are seized, then the Customs Authority will inform the
trademark owner, who will have 10 working days to provide a
technical report confirming that the goods are in fact counterfeited.
After that, the owner of the seized goods will have 10 working days
to provide a response to the technical report.
Based on the parties arguments and evidence, the Customs
Authority will then assess if the goods are counterfeited or not, and
if so it may proceed with the final seizure of the goods and apply
the penalty of forfeiture.
It is relevant to highlight that some Customs Authorities understand
that this final seizure must be requested by the trademark owner
before the court, but this is not the position adopted by the Superior
Court of Justice, which has already decided that Customs
Authorities may proceed with the final seizure irrespective of a
court order to do so.
WWW.ICLG.CO.UK 33
 Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
15 Other Related Rights
15.1 To what extent are unregistered trade mark rights
enforceable in Brazil?
With regard to trademark protection, Brazil adopts an attributive
Brazil
system, which means that trademark rights are only acquired
through the respective registration with the BPTO.
As an exception, however, the Brazilian IP Law provides, under
article 126, that well-known trademarks within its branch of
activity, pursuant to article 6bis (I) of the Paris Convention, enjoy
special protection regardless of whether they have been filed or
registered in Brazil.
Moreover, unregistered trademarks can also be protected in Brazil
through the rules against unfair competition, especially on the
grounds of article 195, III, of the Brazilian IP Law, which
establishes that a crime of unfair competition is practised by anyone
who employs fraudulent means to divert another partys clientele to
his or a third partys advantage.
Nevertheless, it is important to stress that unregistered trademarks
may only be protected through unfair competition rules if there is
actual competition between the trademark owner and the infringer.
Also, the extent of this protection will depend on the prior use of an
unregistered trademark by its owner.
15.2 To what extent does a company name offer protection
from use by a third party?
The extension of company name protection in Brazil is still a
controversial matter.
The Brazilian Civil Code provides that such protection is limited to
the States where the company has registered its bylaws, unless the
special protection extendable to the entire national territory has
been requested. Nonetheless, this special protection has never been
regulated by any other piece of legislation, so in order to obtain
national protection a company would have to file its bylaws before
the Board of Trade of every Brazilian State.
Article 8bis of the Paris Convention, on the other hand, does not
limit company name protection to a specific territory, so for foreign
companies said protection would be considered national, instead of
restricted to a specific State.
It is also relevant to stress that the moment from which a company
name is protected is also controversial, as some argue it would be
from the filing of the respective bylaw before the Board of Trade,
while others believe it is from when the company started its
activities, irrespective of any registration.
15.3 Are there any other rights that confer IP protection, for
instance book title and film title rights?
According to Brazilian law, book and film titles are protected by
copyright, as long as they are original and not likely to be confused
with others works for the same nature, prior disclosed by third
parties. Besides this, we highlight that there is no additional
protection for book and film titles under the trademark scope.
16 Domain Names
16.1 Who can own a domain name?
A domain name can be owned by natural and legal persons legally
34 WWW.ICLG.CO.UK
Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Brazil
established or represented in Brazil with regular registration before
the Ministry of Finance (having a number of the National Register
of Legal Entities (CNPJ), which is issued by the Brazilian Internal
Revenue Service.
Foreign companies are bound to have their domain names
registered in the name of their local legal representatives in the
country.
16.2 How is a domain name registered?
After checking the availability of the intended domain name, the
registration procedure is quite simple: applying the request and
paying the necessary official fees. Once this is done, the applicant
receives a confirmation that the domain name was duly registered.
16.3 What protection does a domain name afford per se?
Although there is no clear legal disposition to what protection is
conferred to domain names, it is afforded protection against the use
of identical and similar domain names and such protection is also
extendable to the conflict between domain names composed by
registered trademarks, commercial names, among others.
In this sense, considering that similar/identical domain names can
lead to confusion for consumers, especially for those websites that
have similar content, the dispute between them can be guided by the
laws of unfair competition. Therefore, it is possible to:
a) file a court action requesting the ceasing of the infringement
and the assignment/cancellation of the domain name; or
b) initiate an Administrative Procedure (SACI-Adm)
applicable to all .br domain names by which the owner
seeks the transfer/cancellation of the infringer domain name
through an Arbitration Mediation. Nowadays, three dispute
centres have often been accredited: WIPO; CSD-ABPI
(Center of Disputes Solutions in Intellectual Property of the
IP Brazilian Association); and CCBC (Committee of
Controversies about Domain Registration of the Center of
Arbitration and Mediation Chamber of Commerce Brazil-
Canada).
17 Current Developments
17.1 What have been the significant developments in relation
to trade marks in the last year?
A new administrative procedure for the recognition of the status of
high renown for registered trademarks has been set in place by
the BPTO. The new resolution creates rules for an independent and
autonomous procedure, allowing the owner of a trademark to
directly request the recognition of high renown status in order to
obtain the special protection foreseen by Brazilian law, including all
branches of activities.
The BPTO has also once again modified its Guidelines for Trade
Mark Application Examination, and is implementing new measures
to expedite internal procedures.
17.2 Are there any significant developments expected in the
next year?
In its last reports, the BPTO emphasised the importance of adhering
to the Madrid System for the international registration of trademarks
and developments are expected in this sense, although we are not
able to assure that such adhesion will happen in the near future.
ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014
Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property Brazil

17.3 Are there any general practice or enforcement trends that
have become apparent in Brazil over the last year or so?
During the last year we have seen an increase in the number of
measures and lawsuits involving ambush marketing and related
matters, given the proximity with the World Cup. We believe that
this number will continue to rise in the following years, at least until
the end of the Olympic Games to be held in Rio de Janeiro.
Another trend that we have observed in the past few years, and that
we believe will continue happening for a while, refers to the
creation of specialised courts in different States to decide corporate
matters, including IP.

Brazil
Laetitia dHanens Fernando Eid Philipp
Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property
Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 1485, 11th floor Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 1485, 11th floor
Torre Norte, So Paulo Torre Norte, So Paulo
Brazil Brazil

Tel: +55 11 2149 4500 Tel: +55 11 2149 4500

Fax: +55 11 3819 0455 Fax: +55 11 3819 0455
Email: ldhanens@glpi.com.br Email: feid@glpi.com.br
URL: www.glpi.com.br URL: www.glpi.com.br

Mrs. Laetitia dHanens leads the trademark, the consultancy and
the contracts teams at Gusmo & Labrunie Intellectual Property.
With the firm since 1996, she has built a solid background in all
areas of intellectual property law, with special emphasis on
contracts and consultancy. Mrs. dHanens graduated in Law at
the Universidade de So Paulo (1995), and obtained her Masters
(LL.M.) degree in Comparative Law at the Universit Libre de
Bruxelles (1998). A member of the Brazilian Bar Association
(OAB) and the Brazilian Intellectual Property Association (ABPI)
where she coordinated the Geographical Indications Standing
Committee and thereafter the Trademark Standing Committee
Mrs. dHanens is fluent in Portuguese, English and French.
Mr. Fernando Eid Philipp leads the litigation team at Gusmo &
Labrunie Intellectual Property. Mr. Philipp graduated in Law at
Universidade Mackenzie (1997), obtained the title of Specialist at
the Centre DEtudes Internationales de la Proprit Industrielle at
the Universit de Strasbourg (2001), and a Masters degree
(LL.M.), also from the Universit de Strasbourg (2002). He also
holds a post-graduate degree in Civil Litigation Procedure from
Centro de Extenso Universitria (2005), and a degree in
Intellectual Property from the Franklin Pierce Law Center. Mr.
Philipp, fluent in Portuguese, English and French, is a member of
the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB) and the Brazilian Intellectual
Property Association (ABPI).

Gusmo & Labrunie was founded in 1988, aimed at gathering a team of highly qualified professionals to provide legal and technical
services of the highest standards, exclusively concerning Intellectual Property, but encompassing all of its aspects.
Our relationship with clients is based on the principles of rationality, coherence and transparency, seeking overall efficiency. The
idea is to offer the most adequate solution for each individual case, avoiding both excesses and risks. In other words, to determine
what is necessary and to keep to it.
Such an innovative position breaks away from past paradigms, reducing costs and beginning a closer and more interdependent
relationship with clients, that is better expressed by the term partnership.

ICLG TO: TRADE MARKS 2014 WWW.ICLG.CO.UK 35

Published and reproduced with kind permission by Global Legal Group Ltd, London
Other titles in the ICLG series include:
Alternative Investment Funds International Arbitration
Aviation Law Lending & Secured Finance
Business Crime Litigation & Dispute Resolution
Cartels & Leniency Merger Control
Class & Group Actions Mergers & Acquisitions
Competition Litigation Mining Law
Construction & Engineering Law Oil & Gas Regulation
Copyright Patents
Corporate Governance Pharmaceutical Advertising
Corporate Immigration Private Client
Corporate Recovery & Insolvency Product Liability
Corporate Tax Project Finance
Data Protection Public Procurement
Employment & Labour Law Real Estate
Environment & Climate Change Law Securitisation
Franchise Shipping Law
Insurance & Reinsurance Telecoms, Media & Internet

59 Tanner Street, London SE1 3PL, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7367 0720 / Fax: +44 20 7407 5255
Email: sales@glgroup.co.uk

www.iclg.co.uk