Journal of Intellectual Property Rights

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

‘Unpackaging’ Trademark Through Tobacco Regulations


Affiliations
1 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Petroleum House, 17, Jamshedji Tata Road, Churchgate, Mumbai - 400 020, India
 

Minimum requirements of the WHO’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and its Guidelines has required the Member States to raise concerns related to public health by regulating advertisement and marketing, and also leaving scope for introducing more stringent measures. This initiated several discussions over the issues concerning effect of such legislation’s new labeling requirements (plain packaging) on the intellectual property rights (trademark rights) of the tobacco manufacturers. The justifications for the new limitations are considered from a broader global perspective and from an Intellectual Property law one. This paper examines case law, legislative provisions and surveys approved by WHO, alongwith reports made post implementation of plain packaging in Australia, and other relevant available data and information. It further aims to reflect on the character of protection, arguing that there is neither deprivation nor expropriation of property, but a mere control of use and that the right conferred upon registration of a mark is iusexcludentialios and not a right to use. It also discusses on how plain packaging is oppressive towards the interests of the trademark proprietors and is not the most effective for attaining the public health objective, while drawing upon sociological and economical research, and how it possesses the risk of increase of illicit trade and counterfeits.

Keywords

Tobacco Regulation, WHO, generic packaging, Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Packaging and Labeling) Rules, 2008, TRIPS Agreement, Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of NCDs 2013-2020, Paris Convention.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Jacobs M, From the First to the Last Ash: The History, Economics & Hazards of Tobacco (1992), http://healthliteracy.worlded.org/docs/tobacco/Unit1/2history _of.html.

  • Bunch F A, Cigarettes Were Once ‘Physician’ Tested, Approved, https://www.drfarrahmd.com/2019/11/cigaretteswereonce-physician-tested.html.

  • Ash A, Defining Moment: The Nazis launch the first public anti-smoking campaign, Financial Times (17 September 2010), https://www.ft.com/content/3d78d24a-c068-11df8a81-00144feab49a.

  • Tobacco Fact Sheet, WHO (May 2017), http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs339/en/.

  • Osei Tutu J J, Human development as a core objective of global intellectual property, Kentucky Law Journal, 105 (2016) 16.

  • Case C-102/77 Hoffmann-La Roche/Centrafarm[1979] ECR 1139 Para 7.

  • Dean O H, Deprivation of trademarks through state interference in their usage, European Intellectual Property Review, 35 (10) (2013) 576.

  • Adriano V, Smoking or physical exercise? European Intellectual Property Review, 36 (10) (2014) 613.

  • WHO, Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, 5 (2003), http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2003/9241591013.pdf.

  • WHO, Guidelines for Implementation of Article 11 of The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, Packaging And Labeling of Tobacco Products, 46 (17–22 November 2008), http://www.who.int/fctc/guidelines/article_11.pdf. [hereinafterGuidelines 11].

  • Snowdon C, Plain Packaging: Commercial expression, AntiSmoking Extremism and the Risks of Hyper-Regulation (Adam Smith Institute, 2012).

  • WHO, Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of NCDs 2013-2020, http://www.who.int/nmh/events/ncd_action_plan/en/.

  • Article 47, Constitution of India, 1950.

  • Cigarettes (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 1975.

  • Murli S Deora v Union of India and Ors WP (Civil) 316 of 1999.

  • The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (hereinafter Act of 2003).

  • Pandey V, India's Another Step Towards Plain Packaging of Cigarettes and Tobacco Products- An Overview of The Legislations Present, http://www.mondaq.com/india/x/448532/Healthcare/Indias+Another+Step+Towards+Plain+Packaging+Of+Cigarettes+And+Tobacco+ProductsAn+Overview+Of+The+Legislations+ Present.

  • Section 31, Act of 2003: Power of Central Government to Make Rules.

  • Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Packaging and Labeling) Rules, 2008.

  • Love Care Foundation v Union of India and Others, Writ Petition No.1078 (M/B) OF 2013.

  • Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Packaging and Labeling) Rules, 2014; Press Information Bureau of India, Pictorial Warnings on Tobacco Products, http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelcontent.aspx?relid=142510.

  • ICANN Organisation, Evidence of ‘Use’ Requirement for Trademark Protections, https://archive.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/trademark-protections-evidence-use-07jun11-en.pdf.

  • University of California, Hohfeld’s Legal Relations, https://www.ics.uci.edu/~alspaugh/cls/shr/hohfeld.html. Singer J W, The legal rights debate in analytical jurisprudence from Bentham to Hohfeld, Wisconsin Law Review, 975 (1982) 986-87.

  • Davison M & Emerton P, Rights, privileges, legitimate interests, and justifiability: Article 20 of TRIPS and Plain Packaging of Tobacco, American University International Law Review, 29 (3) (2014) 505.

  • TRIPS: Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (1994); Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, (1869) UNTS. 299, (1994) 33 ILM 1197 (hereinafter TRIPS Agreement), Article 16(1).

  • Paris Convention for Protection of Industrial Property of March 20 1883, Article 6 quinquies C(1) (hereinafter Paris Convention).

  • Davison M, Plain packaging of Cigarettes: Would it be lawful? Australian Intellectual Property Law Bulletin, 23 (2010) 105; Carvalho N P, The TRIPS Regime of Trademarks Designs (Kluwer), 2nded, (2011) 343.

  • Dispute Settlement: DS174 ‘Panel Report, EC– Trademark sand Geographical Indications (Australia))’ [7.664].

  • Article 17, TRIPS.

  • Article 19(1), TRIPS.

  • Article 11, FCTC, World Health Organization.

  • Article 11(1)(a) FCTC, World Health Organization.

  • Article 11(4) FCTC, World Health Organization.

  • Halabi S, International trademark protection and global public health: A just compensation regime for expropriations and regulatory takings, Catholic University Law Review, 61 (2012)325.

  • Bonadio E, Plain packaging of tobacco products under EU Intellectual Property Law, European Intellectual Property Review, (2012) 599.

  • Philip Morris Brands SARL and Others v Secretary of State for Health C-547/14 [CJEU].

  • British American Tobacco and Others v. Department of Health [2016] EWHC 1169.

  • Para 15, Guidelines for implementation of Article 13 FCTC, WHO: “Packaging is an important element of advertising and promotion. Tobacco pack or product features are used in various ways to attract consumers, to promote products and to cultivate and promote brand identity, for example by using logos, colours, fonts, pictures, shapes and materials on or in packs or on individual cigarettes or other tobacco products.”

  • Moodie C, Ford A, MacKintosh A M & Purves R, Are all cigarettes just the same? Female's perceptions of slim, coloured, aromatized and capsule cigarettes, Health Education Research, 30 (1) (2015) 1-12; Department of Health and Ageing, Government of Australia, Market Research to Determine Effective Plain Packaging of Tobacco Product, August (2011), https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/market-research-to-determine-effectiveplainpackaging-of-tobacco-products.pdf.

  • McDonald J, Plain packaging for cigarettes: Evaluating implementation in the UK, The Public Sphere: Journal of Public Policy, 3 (2) (2015) 96-112.

  • White V, Williams T & Wakefield M, Has the introduction of plain packaging with larger graphic health warnings changed adolescents’ perception of cigarette packs and brand? B M J Journals Tobacco Control, 24 (2) (2015) 42.

  • Holy Monasteries v Greece App no 00013092/87 & 00013984/88 (1994) 20 EHRR 1.

  • British American Tobacco and Others v Department of Health [2016] EWHC 1169.

  • Papamichalopoulos v Greece App no 14556/89 (1993) 16 EHRR 440.

  • Article 19(1)(g) Constitution of India, 1950.

  • Alemanno A, Out of sight out of mind, Columbia Journal of European Law, 18 (2) (2012) 197.

  • Staffin E B, The Dilution Doctrine: Towards A reconciliation with the Lanham Act, Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal, 6 (1) (1995) 105.

  • Phillips J, Trade Marks at the Limit (Edward Elgar, 2006).

  • The World’s Most Valuable Brands’ (Forbes, 2017).

  • Australian Crime Commission’s yearly public report, Organised crime in Australia 2015, 68, https://www.acic.gov.au/sites/g/files/net1491/f/2016/06/oca 2015.pdf.

  • Guidelines for Examination in OHIM, Part B, Examination, Section 4 Absolute Grounds for Refusal.

  • Kaul A & Wolf M, The (Possible) Effect of Plain Packaging on the Smoking Prevalence of Minors in Australia: A Trend Analysis (2014), Working Paper No. 149 (Online ISSN 1664-705X) 9-10, www.econ.uzh.ch/static/wp/econwp149.pdf.

  • Plain Packaging. The evidence speaks for itself (JTI, 2013), http://www.jti.com/in-focus/plain-packaging/.

  • Chapman S, The slow-burn, devastating impact of tobacco plain packs, The Conversation (3 December 2015), http://theconversation.com/the-slow-burn-devastatingimpactof-tobacco-plain-packs-51727.

  • Snowdon C, Plain Packaging: Commercial Expression, AntiSmoking Extremism and the Risks of Hyper-Regulation (Adam Smith Institute, 2012) 44.


Abstract Views: 228

PDF Views: 111




  • ‘Unpackaging’ Trademark Through Tobacco Regulations

Abstract Views: 228  |  PDF Views: 111

Authors

Abhijeet Kumar
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Petroleum House, 17, Jamshedji Tata Road, Churchgate, Mumbai - 400 020, India

Abstract


Minimum requirements of the WHO’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and its Guidelines has required the Member States to raise concerns related to public health by regulating advertisement and marketing, and also leaving scope for introducing more stringent measures. This initiated several discussions over the issues concerning effect of such legislation’s new labeling requirements (plain packaging) on the intellectual property rights (trademark rights) of the tobacco manufacturers. The justifications for the new limitations are considered from a broader global perspective and from an Intellectual Property law one. This paper examines case law, legislative provisions and surveys approved by WHO, alongwith reports made post implementation of plain packaging in Australia, and other relevant available data and information. It further aims to reflect on the character of protection, arguing that there is neither deprivation nor expropriation of property, but a mere control of use and that the right conferred upon registration of a mark is iusexcludentialios and not a right to use. It also discusses on how plain packaging is oppressive towards the interests of the trademark proprietors and is not the most effective for attaining the public health objective, while drawing upon sociological and economical research, and how it possesses the risk of increase of illicit trade and counterfeits.

Keywords


Tobacco Regulation, WHO, generic packaging, Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Packaging and Labeling) Rules, 2008, TRIPS Agreement, Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of NCDs 2013-2020, Paris Convention.

References