DOCSLIB.ORG

Brexit Blowout K&L Gates Details What Brexit Means for Australian Brands Protecting Their IP

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Brexit Blowout K&L Gates Details What Brexit Means for Australian Brands Protecting Their IP 26 SEPTEMBER 2016 LEGAL EYE WWW.RAGTRADER.COM.AU PRESENTED BY Brexit blowout K&L Gates details what Brexit means for Australian brands protecting their IP. S THE SHOCK waves caused by a Brit- can consider establishing subsidiaries in a nounce a conversion process which will ish vote to leave the European Union qualifying country, or have designers work facilitate recognition of existing rights at A(EU) begin to subside, it is evident out of qualifying countries so that they are UK national level. that Brexit will have far reaching ramifi- “habitual residents”. If this qualification Companies and designers who are fil- cations for anyone interacting with intel- status can be achieved, then the UKUDR ing new designs or marks in the coming lectual property (IP) rights in the UK and will provide some comfort to designers. months should consider applying to regis- Europe, particularly those in the fashion While the UKUDR does not protect ter a UK design/mark and EU registered and retail sectors. 2D works (such as fabric prints), there is design/mark concurrently in order to avoid While it will be some time before the copyright protection which will go some an uncertain conversion process. Using the consequences of Brexit will be known way to bridging the gap left between current EU conversion process is not rec- from an IP perspective, designers should EUUDR and the UKUDR. Copyright ommended until greater clarity about the be thinking proactively about how to best arises under national law, so will not be implications of Brexit is available, as this protect themselves if the UK remains an directly affected by Brexit. Australian na- route only permits complete conversion of important market. tionals can enjoy the same level of copy- a EUTM into individual national rights Below we highlight some key issues brand right protection in the UK as UK nation- and does not allow a proprietor to retain owners and designers should consider. als due to reciprocal rights in international any element of the EUTM. agreements governing copyright. Brexit clearly raises a number of impor- Unregistered Designs & Copyright Further, following recent changes to tant considerations for the fashion indus- Unlike Australia which has no protection copyright law in the UK, designers of mass try. While many elements of what a Brexit for unregistered designs, fashion designers produced artistic works (where more than may look like are yet to be determined, de- can currently utilise the EU-wide system of 50 items have been made) will enjoy a sig- signers and fashion houses for whom the unregistered design protection (EUUDR) nificantly longer period of protection for UK is an important market should consid- to protect the appearance of a design (2D their copyright works (life of the designer er taking steps to review and bolster their and 3D features) for three years from the plus 70 years, instead of just 25 years). This IP protection in the short term. ■ date the design was first made available to is good news for fashion designers who the public in the EU. deal in commercial quantities. Following a formal Brexit, however, As ever, reliance on unregistered rights Submitted by K&L Gates partner Arthur Artinian the EUUDR will no longer have effect alone is likely to create risks for designers. and associate Briony Pollard. For more in the UK. Registration of designs in the UK is avail- information about design and trade mark Nevertheless, protection for unregis- able and should be considered for particu- registration and en-forcement, please contact tered designs will continue to be available larly important designs. Arthur Artinian ([email protected]). This under the UK unregistered design right article is for informational purposes and does not system (UKUDR). EU Registered Trade Marks & Designs contain or convey legal advice. The information The UKUDR is more generous in time Once the UK leaves the EU, regis- herein should not be used or relied upon in regard scale than its EU counterpart and lasts tered IP rights such as EU trade marks to any particular facts or circumstances without the earlier of: (EUTM) and designs may cease to have first consulting a lawyer. 15 years from the end of the calendar effect in the UK. The UK Government is year when the design was first recorded in expected to an- a design document or from when an article was first made to the design plus 10 years from the end of the calendar year when ar- ticles made to the design were first made available for sale or hire. However, the UKUDR only protects designs created by a resident of a “quali- fying country”, the list of which is very narrow and crucially does not include Australia. To overcome this re- quirement, Aus- tralian designers .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 854 Final ANNEXES 1 to 3 ANNEXES to The
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 25.12.2020 COM(2020) 854 final ANNEXES 1 to 3 ANNEXES to the Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the Brexit Adjustment Reserve EN EN ANNEX I Allocation method for the pre-financing of the Brexit Adjustment Reserve The pre-financing of the Brexit Adjustment Reserve shall be distributed between the Member States according to the following methodology: 1. Each Member State’s share from pre-financing of the Brexit Adjustment Reserve is determined as the sum of a factor linked to the fish caught in the waters that belong to the UK Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and a factor linked to trade with the UK. 2. The factor linked to fish caught in the UK EEZ is used to allocate EUR 600 million. The factor linked to trade is used to allocate EUR 3 400 million. Both amounts are expressed in 2018 prices. 3. The factor linked to fisheries is determined on the basis of the following criterion and by applying the following steps: a) share of each Member State of the total value of the fish caught in the UK EEZ; b) these shares are increased for Member States with fisheries that have an above average dependency on the fish caughts in the UK EEZ and decreased for the ones that have a below average dependency as following: (i) for each Member State, the value of fish caught in UK EEZ as a percentage of the total value of fish caught by that Member State is expressed as an index of the EU average (index of dependency); (ii) the initial share of the value of fish caught in the UK EEZ is adjusted by multiplying it with the Member State’s index of dependency; (iii) these adjusted shares are rescaled to ensure that the sum of all Member States’ shares equals 100%.
    [Show full text]
  • The Brexit Vote: a Divided Nation, a Divided Continent
    Sara Hobolt The Brexit vote: a divided nation, a divided continent Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Hobolt, Sara (2016) The Brexit vote: a divided nation, a divided continent. Journal of European Public Policy, 23 (9). pp. 1259-1277. ISSN 1466-4429 DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2016.1225785 © 2016 Routledge This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/67546/ Available in LSE Research Online: November 2016 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. The Brexit Vote: A Divided Nation, a Divided Continent Sara B. Hobolt London School of Economics and Political Science, UK ABSTRACT The outcome of the British referendum on EU membership sent shockwaves through Europe. While Britain is an outlier when it comes to the strength of Euroscepticism, the anti- immigration and anti-establishment sentiments that produced the referendum outcome are gaining strength across Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Singapore on the Thames : Model for a Post‑Brexit UK?
    This document is downloaded from DR‑NTU (https://dr.ntu.edu.sg) Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Singapore on the Thames : Model for a Post‑Brexit UK? Martin, David 2020 Martin, D. (2020). Singapore on the Thames : Model for a Post‑Brexit UK? (RSIS Commentaries, No. 020). RSIS Commentaries. Singapore: Nanyang Technological University. https://hdl.handle.net/10356/137261 Nanyang Technological University Downloaded on 30 Sep 2021 07:03:19 SGT Singapore on the Thames: Model for a Post-Brexit UK? By David Martin SYNOPSIS Last week, the UK formally exited the European Union. As it charts a new destiny outside the EU post-Brexit, the domestic debate is whether it should adopt the Singapore model of economic self-reliance. Can ‘Singapore on the Thames’ work? COMMENTARY ‘SINGAPORE ON the Thames’ has become an unfortunate shorthand for what many Brexiteers laud as a model for Britain’s economy, now that it has formally left the European Union on 31 January 2020. Unfortunate for Singapore because it promotes a flawed view of its economic success and an international image it could do without. Unfortunate for the United Kingdom because the version of the Singapore model it promotes is both undeliverable and certain to make any trade deal with the EU more difficult, if not impossible, to deliver. Singapore’s Image in Britain The image of Singapore being promoted is that of a low tax (even tax haven), unregulated, small government laissez faire paradise. The advocates of ‘Singapore on the Thames’ either ignore or are ignorant of the fact that on top of a relatively low tax rate the Central Provident Fund compels workers and employers to contribute 37% of wages and salaries.
    [Show full text]
  • BREXIT DIVORCE BILL” Eulalia Rubio | Senior Research Fellow, Jacques Delors Institute
    TRIBUNE 21 NOVEMBER 2017 UNDERSTANDING THE “BREXIT DIVORCE BILL” Eulalia Rubio | Senior research fellow, Jacques Delors Institute T he UK’s financial settlement, or so-called “Brexit divorce bill”, refers to the expected payment the United Kingdom has to make to the EU to honour its share of the financial commitments jointly undertaken by EU countries while the UK was a member of the European Union. In media and in public discussions, there is some con- remaining EU-27 should adjust the MFF to reflect the fusion with regard to the nature of this payment and fact that one of the biggest net contributors is leaving. the legal and political arguments supporting the EU’s However, enlargement differs from withdrawal in that claim. The UK media tends to label this payment as an it is a decision adopted unanimously by EU member “exit bill” the EU is imposing on the UK to open trade states, not imposed by one of them on the others. talks. Brexit bill talks are also frequently portrayed as classical, zero-sum money negotiations. In reality, dis- It is also important to note that part of spending com- agreements on the amount of the bill hide more pro- mitments linked to this MFF will be executed after found discrepancies regarding the nature and compo- 2020. This is the famous RAL or “Reste-à-Liquider”, sition of this payment and, ultimately, in relation to the that is, the amount of spending authorised in EU nature of EU membership and the purpose of Brexit annual budgets but still not executed.
    [Show full text]
  • Background, Brexit, and Relations with the United States
    The United Kingdom: Background, Brexit, and Relations with the United States Updated April 16, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL33105 SUMMARY RL33105 The United Kingdom: Background, Brexit, and April 16, 2021 Relations with the United States Derek E. Mix Many U.S. officials and Members of Congress view the United Kingdom (UK) as the United Specialist in European States’ closest and most reliable ally. This perception stems from a combination of factors, Affairs including a sense of shared history, values, and culture; a large and mutually beneficial economic relationship; and extensive cooperation on foreign policy and security issues. The UK’s January 2020 withdrawal from the European Union (EU), often referred to as Brexit, is likely to change its international role and outlook in ways that affect U.S.-UK relations. Conservative Party Leads UK Government The government of the UK is led by Prime Minister Boris Johnson of the Conservative Party. Brexit has dominated UK domestic politics since the 2016 referendum on whether to leave the EU. In an early election held in December 2019—called in order to break a political deadlock over how and when the UK would exit the EU—the Conservative Party secured a sizeable parliamentary majority, winning 365 seats in the 650-seat House of Commons. The election results paved the way for Parliament’s approval of a withdrawal agreement negotiated between Johnson’s government and the EU. UK Is Out of the EU, Concludes Trade and Cooperation Agreement On January 31, 2020, the UK’s 47-year EU membership came to an end.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit Tax Competition Between the UK and the EU27
    Brexit: tax competition between the UK and the EU27 Since the outcome of the Brexit referendum there has been speculation about whether any UK/EU trade agreement would allow the UK to position itself as a tax haven. The UK/EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement imposes a number of restrictions on the UK, including subsidy controls and commitments to maintain certain OECD tax standards. Outside of these restrictions, opportunities remain for the UK to make its tax regime more competitive as compared to its EU27 neighbours, but it seems likely that divergences between the tax regimes of these jurisdictions will in any event develop over time. Throughout the various stages of the Brexit negotiations, there has been speculation about what the final terms of any trade agreement would say about tax; in particular, whether the deal might allow the UK to position itself as the media-dubbed ‘Singapore-on-Thames’. The broad idea being that the UK could set itself up as a tax haven boldly neighbouring the EU27 jurisdictions by aggressively reducing its corporate tax rate, offering targeted tax incentives to attract businesses to the UK and diluting rules countering tax avoidance. The question is whether the Brexit trade deal, as agreed at the eleventh hour, allows for this. The ‘Singapore-on-Thames’ concept can be traced back to comments made by the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond, in January 2017, that in the event of a no-deal Brexit the UK would be forced to change its economic model to remain competitive. Boris Johnson, in his capacity as both foreign secretary and subsequently prime minister, fanned the flames of this idea with comments about seizing the opportunity of Brexit to reform the UK’s tax system and simplify regulation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Realities of Trade After Brexit
    The realities of trade after Brexit A new perspective from Baker McKenzie As companies consider their strategies for life in a post-Brexit world, there remains great uncertainty about the UK’s future trading relationship with the European Union. In this report, Baker McKenzie goes behind the headlines to uncover what the impact of ‘hard Brexit’ would be in four sectors that are key to UK manufacturing and to our clients: the automotive, technology, healthcare and consumer goods industries. For the purposes of this study, a hard Brexit is one in which the UK leaves the EU customs union and bilateral tariffs revert to WTO ‘Most Favoured Nation’ levels for all UK-EU trade in goods. This would be a ‘worst case’ scenario, which the UK is seeking to avoid, however, this model allows us to draw the strongest possible contrast between continued membership of the Single Market and each of the various ‘options’ posited for post-Brexit Britain. It is important to note that this research is limited to the above hard Brexit scenario and does not account for currency fluctuations, trade agreements with the EU or third countries, or any other measures such as state aid that could offset the potential losses associated with exiting the Single Market. Our findings shed new light on the real costs of Brexit, in both monetary and human terms, and uncover details about the level of dependency that exists between the EU and the UK. We also explore some overlooked but crucial issues for the business community, including the impact that non-tariff barriers will have on post-Brexit Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • 5. Advertising and Persuasion: a Literature Review
    Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English and American Studies English Language and Literature Bc. Natália Belicová Advertising Brexit: Elements of Persuasion in the Facebook Campaign Master’s Diploma Thesis Supervisor: Mgr. Jana Pelclová, Ph. D. 2020 I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography. …………………………………………….. Natália Belicová I would like to thank my supervisor Mgr. Jana Pelclová, Ph. D., for her invaluable advice, guidance, and willingness to meet regularly online whenever I felt the need to discuss a problem. I genuinely appreciate it. I also thank everybody who helped me and supported me when writing this thesis, especially Jakub G.. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 5 2. Aim and data ............................................................................................................. 7 3. Methodology of research ........................................................................................... 9 4. Historical background of Brexit ................................................................................ 10 5. Advertising and persuasion: A literature review ....................................................... 13 6. Analysis of the persuasive elements ......................................................................... 19 6.1. Linguistic modes of persuasion ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Singapore on the Thames?
    CITYPERC Policy Report 2017/MAY A SINGAPORE ON THE THAMES? POST-BREXIT DEREGULATION IN THE UK City Political Economy Research Centre City, University of London [email protected] @cityperc A SINGAPORE ON THE THAMES? POST-BREXIT DEREGULATION IN THE UK CITYPERC 12 May 2017 — CITYPERC POLICY REPORT 2017/MAY — Contents 1 Executive Summary 3 2 Introduction 5 ANASTASIA NESVETAILOVA City, University of London 3 Politics and the Fragile Alliance of the Brexit Vote 9 RONEN PALAN City, University of London 4 Financial Regulatory Arbitrage after Brexit: How Feasible? 14 STEFANO PAGLIARI City, University of London 5 The Failure of Financial Market Integration in the EU and the Looming Dominance of Wall Street 19 JOHN GRAHL University of Middlesex 6 How Might the UK be Turned into a Tax Haven? 22 RICHARD MURPHY City, University of London 7 Brexit as a Catalyst for Reinventing the Eurodollar Markets 26 IZABELLA KAMINSKA Financial Times 8 Singapore-on-the-Thames: Slogan or Strategy? 28 JOHN CHIRSTIANSEN Tax Justice Network 2 — CITYPERC POLICY REPORT 2017/MAY — Executive Summary • The so-called ‘Singapore on the Thames’ scenarios for post-Brexit UK tend to envisage a country that has abandoned the red tape of EU regulations, likely adopted a unilateral free trade approach and introduced a low taxation regime for the corporate sector. • Technically, it is possible to make Britain into a low corporate tax juris- diction. However, while the abolition of corporation tax would create an entirely tax-free environment for foreign shareholders in UK companies, this measure would end up increasing taxes on UK privately owned businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • EU Authorities Publish a New Approach to Brexit Withdrawal Agreement Conditions and the Grandfathering of Regulations After 31 December 2020
    Insights from Global Mobility Services United Kingdom: EU authorities publish a new approach to Brexit withdrawal agreement conditions and the grandfathering of regulations after 31 December 2020 3 November 2020 In brief Following on from our insight on 29 January 2020 outlining the transitional rules agreed between the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU) for cross border-arrangements before and after 31 December 2020, the European Commission have since released further proposed guidance on the eligibility of the transitional rules on current intra-European arrangements. The content of this guidance suggests excluding a considerable population of workers from ongoing European coordination rules across social security and immigration. However, a number of major authorities around Europe have stated their disagreement with this. Furthermore, the UK authorities, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC), have subsequently issued guidance supporting the original interpretation of the transitional rules. While the European Commission’s comments should be acknowledged, it appears that they have little support from a technical nor practical point of view across Europe. In detail Transitional rules under the withdrawal agreement At the beginning of 2020, the UK House of Commons, House of Lords, the Queen and the EU parliament approved the withdrawal agreement and transitional guidance, that conveyed the message of continuing with the ‘status quo’ for social security/immigration coordination rules up to 31 December 2020. Such agreement meant that it would be possible to continue to utilise the existing regulations during the transition period and thereafter where the individual's situation continues without interruption into 2021. www.pwc.com Insights European Commission's latest guidance on the application of the withdrawal agreement The European Union and the UK are, at present, negotiating an agreement on a new partnership, providing notably for a free trade area.
    [Show full text]
  • Not in the Same Boat
    NOT IN THE SAME BOAT THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF BREXIT ACROSS UK FISHING FLEETS NEW ECONOMICS FOUNDATION NOT IN THE SAME BOAT THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF BREXIT ACROSS UK FISHING FLEETS CONTENTS SUMMARY 2 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 8 SECTION 2: THE POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS OF BREXIT FOR UK FISHING FLEETS 10 2.1 BREXIT WILL FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT 10 2.2 THE POLITICAL REALITIES OF BREXIT 13 2.3 BREXIT IMPACT: CHANGE IN ACCESS TO WATERS (MODELLED) 17 2.4 BREXIT IMPACT: CHANGE IN QUOTA (MODELLED) 22 2.5 BREXIT IMPACT: CHANGE IN QUOTA SETTING AND OVERFISHING (MODELLED) 26 2.6 BREXIT IMPACT: CHANGE IN TARIFFS TO ACCESS THE EU MARKET (MODELLED) 29 2.7 BREXIT IMPACT: CHANGES TO NON-TARIFF BARRIERS TO TRADE (MODELLED) 30 2.8 BREXIT IMPACT: MACROECONOMIC CHANGE (NOT MODELLED) 30 2.9 BREXIT IMPACT: CHANGES IN THE FREE MOVEMENT OF EU LABOUR (NOT MODELLED) 34 2.10 BREXIT IMPACT: CHANGES IN FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT (NOT MODELLED) 35 2.11 BREXIT IMPACT: REGULATORY CHANGE (NOT MODELLED) 36 2.12 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL FACTORS AFFECTING UK FISHERIES POST BREXIT 39 SECTION 3: COMBINING BREXIT SCENARIOS 41 3.1 MAIN SCENARIOS 41 3.2 WHY AN ECONOMIC SCENARIO ANALYSIS IS NECESSARY 44 3.3 THE DIVERSITY OF THE UK FLEET REQUIRES DISAGGREGATED ANALYSIS 45 SECTION 4: RESULTS 48 4.1 RESULTS 48 4.2 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 55 4.3 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 60 SECTION 5: DISCUSSION 65 5.1 UNDERSTANDING THE RESULTS IN THE CONTEXT OF ENTHUSIASTIC INDUSTRY SENTIMENT FOR BREXIT 65 5.2 COULD OVERFISHING REALLY HAPPEN HERE? 69 SECTION 6: POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 71 SECTION 7: CONCLUSIONS
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit: the Timeline
    Global - Europe Practice Alert July 2016 Brexit: The Timeline This note addresses the timeline for the UK's exit from the EU. It is one of a series of GTM Alerts designed to assist businesses in identifying the legal issues to consider and address in response to the UK's referendum vote of 23 June 2016 to withdraw from the European Union. The UK has not left the EU. It will remain a member of the EU, and EU law will continue to apply in its territory, until it formally exits. Exit is likely to take some time. Nearly two weeks after the UK referendum vote, a number of practical, political, and legal issues are emerging that may affect the start and timing of the procedure leading up to exit. This exit procedure is set out in Article 50 of one of the two main EU Treaties, the Treaty on European Union. It involves three main steps before exit – notification, negotiation, and approval. These steps are illustrated in a notional timeline at the end of this note and are described in more detail below, together with the issues that may affect the UK's exit date. 1. Notification: Under Article 50, the UK is required to notify the European Council of its decision to withdraw from the EU, but there is no deadline for the notification. • Referendum vote is not a decision: The outcome of the 23 June referendum does not constitute a decision to leave the EU, as it is not binding – its purpose is to advise government of the will of the British people.
    [Show full text]