Comments on: Katy Perry didn’t sue the Oz designer; was busy bathing naked with pizza! http://www.entertainmentandshowbiz.com/katy-perry-didnt-sue-the-oz-designer-was-busy-bathing-naked-with-pizza-2009070317972 Entertainment, Showbiz, Celebrities, Television, Movies, Fashion! Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:23:28 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Duae Quartunciae http://www.entertainmentandshowbiz.com/katy-perry-didnt-sue-the-oz-designer-was-busy-bathing-naked-with-pizza-2009070317972/comment-page-1#comment-5302 Duae Quartunciae Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:23:55 +0000 http://www.entertainmentandshowbiz.com/?p=17972#comment-5302 Just to be crystal clear here... lawyers acting for the singer are taking a "legal action" to remove the recently approved trademark of the designer. It is not a lawsuit, but it is a hearing with IP Australia, where the firm representing the singer are proposing to make a case for why they should be allowed to give a formal opposition beyond the normal time limits. Such a hearing is a legal action, even though it is not in a court. This is called for July 10. The trademark is number 1264761; and by using public search facilities at the website of IP Australia you will be able to confirm the history of the actions taken by the singer's lawyers, and the legal procedures for trademark registration, approval and opposition. I can well believe that this happened fairly automatically without the singer's direct involvement at first. However, by now if the singer is genuine about not wanting to take legal action against the fashion label, then she needs to inform her lawyers to back off. If they don't, she is the responsible party for the attack on the trademark, and on the business which has been using this label from at least Nov 2007, before Katy Perry hit the charts in Australia. Just to be crystal clear here… lawyers acting for the singer are taking a “legal action” to remove the recently approved trademark of the designer. It is not a lawsuit, but it is a hearing with IP Australia, where the firm representing the singer are proposing to make a case for why they should be allowed to give a formal opposition beyond the normal time limits. Such a hearing is a legal action, even though it is not in a court. This is called for July 10.

The trademark is number 1264761; and by using public search facilities at the website of IP Australia you will be able to confirm the history of the actions taken by the singer’s lawyers, and the legal procedures for trademark registration, approval and opposition.

I can well believe that this happened fairly automatically without the singer’s direct involvement at first. However, by now if the singer is genuine about not wanting to take legal action against the fashion label, then she needs to inform her lawyers to back off. If they don’t, she is the responsible party for the attack on the trademark, and on the business which has been using this label from at least Nov 2007, before Katy Perry hit the charts in Australia.

]]>