Question

This paper examines trade mark protection and its impact on the consumer in United Arab Emirates IP legislation, entitled Federal Trademarks Act No.37 of 1992. This act has been amended according to Federal Act No.8 of 2002 in the light of provision within the TRIPS Agreement of 1994, Section (2), Article 15. The concept of a trademark centres upon it's distinguish features, and this paper addresses the concept of deception in a misleading mark. We consider the criteria for determining that a mark is misleading or deceptive, how such misleading marks may affect the consumer, and the role of the consumer in defining deception.

Further, we also address whether IP laws, mainly the Trademark Act, provide sufficient deterrent and safeguards, or if there is a critical need for additional support, such as Consumers Protection Act or Unfair Competition Act. We highlight the similarities, differences, advantages, and disadvantages of the provisions of the two documents, regarding whether these laws sufficiently cover consumers in law. There are elements lacking in the related laws concerning consumer protection, especially in the Federal Trademarks Act, concerning the time range and scope of protection provided in the Act. We consider if the Act covers the registration period, and if, after the registration period, the Act protects consumers against a mark that has lost its distinctiveness after registration. The IP-related legislation Federal Trademarks Act in particular shall be examined in depth for its flaws and the apparent lack of balance between the interests of trademark owners and that of consumers. We argue that there is an urgent need to amend the Federal Trademarks Law as it fails to balance the rights of trademark owners and those of the consumer, in favour of the owners.

i need Rephrase for this abstract plz as soon.

Answer 1

This paper will discuss the clauses for the protection of trade mark and its subsequent effect on the consumers in UAE IP legislation. This act was amended from Federal trademarks Act No. 37 of the year 1992 to the Federal Act No. 8 of the year 2002 by considering the provisions given under TRIPS Agreement of 1994, Section (2), Article 15. The mark is based on the feature of its uniqueness and individuality. It should be original and should have distinct features. This paper will discuss the concept of deception in a misleading mark. This will further delve into describing the criteria which render a mark misleading or deceptive and will analyze and evaluate the impact of such misleading marks on the customers. It will also discuss the role of the consumers in defining deception.

The paper will further delve into the consideration of safeguards and restrictions provides by the IP laws, especially, the Trademark Act and will analyze if there is any necessity for the additional compliances and support from the other laws and acts such as Consumer Protection Act or the Unfair Competition Act. We will highlight the similarities and dissimilarities of the rules written down by the two documents and will study their respective advantages and disadvantages to evaluate whether these laws provide sufficient coverage for the rights of the consumers. The act lacks in terms of the time range and extent of protection given to the consumer. We would further consider if the act provides coverage only for the registration period and whether it would cover the consumer’s right if the trademark lost its distinctiveness after the completion of the registration process. The Federal Trademarks Act, specifically, shall be examined in depth for its flaws and the apparent lack of balance between the interests of trademark owners and that of consumers. We argue that there is a dire need for the amendment in the Federal Trademark Law as it fails to protect the priveleges of the trademark holders and the end users.