Intellectual property rights are widely protected in Brazil. Recognising the importance of ?creations of the human mind? the Brazilian Constitution treats intellectual property rights as a fundamental right, and therefore the rights of creators and innovators cannot be eliminated from the Federal Constitution.
As in most countries, in Brazil, intellectual property is divided into two branches: industrial property and copyright. There are two major laws that regulate industrial property rights and copyright, as well as a number of specific laws on related subjects. For the purposes of this handbook, the relevant national substantive legislation is the following:
Brazil is a member of the Paris Union for the Protection of Industrial Property, as well as the Berne Union for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and has also implemented the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. Hence, intellectual property holders can expect to find a well-structured legal framework for the protection of intellectual property rights in Brazil.
In order to guarantee exclusivity over intellectual creations and innovations, the laws provide for criminal and civil remedies, including provisional remedies intended to cease any counterfeiting immediately. Additionally, there are border enforcement measures and administrative procedures that can be utilized by intellectual property owners.
Even though there have been recent relevant changes to the Brazilian intellectual property legislation in view of the COVID-19 pandemic (for example, as to the patent term and the compulsory licensing of patents), the criminal prosecution and civil enforcement regimes have not been altered significantly over the past few years.
Brazilian legislation is constantly evolving, and there are many bills being discussed in Congress, but there are no imminent changes to current federal legislation that might have a major impact on the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the short term.
The following legal framework can assist in fighting counterfeits in Canada:
Product counterfeiting typically involves a violation of trademark rights or copyright. The Combating Counterfeit Products Act ( S.C. 2014, c. 32) amended the Trademarks Act to expand the rights conferred by registration to include the right to preclude others from manufacturing, possessing, importing, exporting or attempting to export any goods, labels or packaging for the purpose of their sale or distribution if:
Additionally, in 2019, significant changes were implemented to the Trademarks Act dealing with trademark eligibility, examination procedure, ratification of the implementation of the Madrid Protocol and alignment of Canada?s Trademark regime with that of the United States and European Union.
In addition to registered trademarks, common law rights can be acquired through use of the mark in association with goods and services in Canada. As goodwill attaches to the mark, rights owners are able to assert claims against others who use the mark by bringing an action for passing off.
In China, brand owners have an arsenal of civil and criminal laws and regulations at their disposal, which provide various remedies to use in pursuit of efficient and effective anti-counterfeiting enforcement programs. For example, IP rights holders have the ability to initiate a civil litigation before the local Court in which they can seek, among other things, compensation, and injunctive relief. If an infringer?s behavior constitutes a crime, the local Public Security Bureau (PSB) may initiate a criminal action. In addition, IP rights holders have the ability to record their IP rights with Customs, file complaints with online e-commerce platforms, and file complaints with the local Administrative Authority (the AIC). Both Customs and AIC have the authority to seize goods and AIC may also levy fines and conduct raids. E-commerce platforms set their own rules as to how to enforce against counterfeiting violations. In some instances, the platforms have been known to cooperate with, and even proactively share evidence with, law enforcement and/or brand owners regarding potential counterfeit rings or manufacturing operations.
The primary laws relating to IP in China are:
Recently, China revised certain IP-related legislation, issued new guidelines concerning IP rights, as well as new trademark examination guidelines in 2021. Most notably, the trademark examination guidelines now explain the principles for assessing similarity between trademarks when considering an application for registration, including factors that are not inherent to the marks, such as their fame, the degree of attention paid by the public, and the subjective intent of the applicant (helpful in cases involving bad faith filings), among other factors.
In the next decade, it is likely that China will strengthen the protection of intellectual property, including by potentially implementing a stricter system of punitive damages for trademark infringement, intensifying the crackdown on malicious trademark registrations, accelerating the revision of the Patent Law, extending the protection period of design patents, and patent rights more generally. Also, it is anticipated that China will issue new e-commence laws to deal with the platform issues.
The enforcement of IP rights and confronting the import and distribution of counterfeits is given great importance in IP laws and other legislation in Israel. The Israeli enforcement authorities provide rights owners with appropriate and efficient means for enforcing their IP rights.
Israel is also a member of most major international treaties on Intellectual Property rights, including the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS), which is the most relevant treaty to anti-counterfeiting.
The laws governing anti-counterfeiting are:
A recent change to the legal framework in Israel is the legislation of the Design Law, 5777-2017, which took effect on 7 August 2018, and replaced the former Patents and Designs Ordinance (which still governs designs filed before the new Law came into force).
The importation and distribution of goods infringing a design registered in accordance with the new Law constitutes a criminal offence, whereas formerly, design infringement merely constituted a civil wrong. Furthermore, in accordance with the new Design Law, the Customs Authorities are authorized to detain goods suspected of infringing registered designs.
Currently, there are no anticipated changes in the legislation in Israel.
Italian law provisions against IP infringement are quite effective. National law provides the statutory framework for the registration of IP rights, for the substantive rules applicable to registered and unregistered IP rights, for administrative actions before the Italian Patent and Trademark Office and for enforcement of the same (complemented by the relevant Code of Procedure), primarily under the Industrial Property Code (IP Code) (Law decree no. 30/2005) and Copyright Law (Law no. 633/1941 as modified).
National law provisions are aligned with and have been shaped by European legislation (among others, EC Directive no. 2004/48 and Directive no. 2436/2015) and by the International treaties to which Italy is a signatory.
The Criminal Code and the Code of criminal procedure are the main sources for criminal IP rights enforcement, while Border enforcement is primarily governed by EU Regulation No. 608/2013.
Courts? decisions are not binding and thus are not a source of law in Italy. However, especially when issued by higher Courts, they may represent persuasive authority in future cases.
As part of the Next Generation EU programme, issued by the EU in response to the Covid-19 Pandemic crisis, Italy presented the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP) that includes:
The Mexican Constitution provides the basis for the framework of laws that exist in Mexico to protect innovation, creation, commerce and trade. The laws that are used to enforce intellectual property rights and anti-counterfeiting in Mexico are the Federal Law for Industrial Property Protection, the Federal Copyright Law, the Federal Criminal Code, the Federal Civil Code, the Federal Law of Administrative Procedure, the Federal Law of Contentious Administrative Procedure, Customs Law, the Federal Civil Procedure Law and the National Code of Criminal Proceedings, as well as a number of regulations.
In 2020, the United States?Mexico?Canada Agreement was implemented in Mexico. The Agreement features an important IP chapter which includes a series of international duties related to IP rights protection among the Parties. The Agreement?s implementation included the new Federal Law for Industrial Property Protection and relevant amendments to the Federal Copyright Law and the Federal Criminal Code.
Although not so recent, in June 2016 the Criminal Mexican system changed from inquisitorial to an accusatory system. However, we still see processes managed through the old rules (applicable rules of process are the ones in force at the time that the facts took place).
Finally, regulatory disposition applied to labelling also impacted IP in 2021.
New Regulations for the Federal Law of Industrial Property Protection must be issued by the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property for a proper implementation of the new Law.
The applicable intellectual property laws and regulations are the basis for all enforcement actions taken by the owners of registered and unregistered IP Rights. These laws/regulations also enable the Dutch governmental bodies to take appropriate actions against traders in counterfeit products.
The laws and regulations relating to intellectual property rights in the Netherlands (partly EU law and partly national law) are listed below.
At EU-level the following legislation is directly applicable (sorted by category) relating, directly or indirectly, to IP protection.
Intellectual property law:
At national level the following legislation (sorted by category) relating, directly or indirectly, to the protection of intellectual property applies.
On 1 July 2021, in the European Union as well as in the Netherlands, the VAT rules on cross-border business-to-consumer (B2C) e-commerce activities changed, in order to overcome the barriers to cross-border online sales and address challenges arising from the VAT regimes for distance sales of goods and for the importation of small, low value consignments.
The main changes are that online sellers, including online marketplaces/platforms:
Existing thresholds for distance sales of goods within the EU have been abolished and replaced by a new EU-wide threshold of EUR 10,000. Below this EUR 10,000 threshold, the supplies of TBE (telecommunications, broadcasting and electronic) services and distance sales of goods within the EU may remain subject to VAT in the Member State where the taxable person is established.
Special provisions have been introduced whereby online marketplaces/platforms facilitating supplies of goods are deemed for VAT purposes to have received and supplied the goods themselves (?deemed supplier?) and new record keeping requirements have been introduced for online marketplaces/platforms facilitating supplies of goods and services, including where such online marketplaces/platform are not deemed a supplier.
The VAT exemption at importation of small consignments of a value up to EUR 22 has been removed. As a consequence all goods imported in the EU will now be subject to VAT.
A scheme for distance sales of low goods imported from third territories or third countries has been created. The Import One Stop Shop (IOSS) has been created to simplify the declaration and payment of VAT (see www.ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/ioss_en).
Currently there are no anticipated changes to the current legislation in the Netherlands.
The relevant intellectual property laws and regulations which assist in protecting and enforcing intellectual property rights and anti-counterfeiting measures in Spain are:
There have not been any recent developments, but it is worth mentioning that, pursuant to the TM Directive (see Section 1. Criminal Prosecution & Civil Enforcement: Civil enforcement), a recent amendment of the national TM Act has granted the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office (SPTO) jurisdiction over revocation and invalidity proceedings of Spanish trademarks. Such amendment will enter into force on 14 January 2023. As from that date, all invalidity and revocation proceedings will have to be brought before the SPTO, but the National Courts will retain jurisdiction over invalidity and revocation actions exercised as counterclaims in infringement proceedings or directly accumulated in conjunction with an infringement trademarks or design action.
In Ukraine, no laws or regulations deal specifically with counterfeiting. This type of infringement is dealt with under the Trademark Law. The relevant civil and criminal laws contain blanket provisions referring to the Trademark Law, particularly the definition of ?use of a trademark?.
Provisions on remedies against counterfeiters are set out in:
The relevant procedures are set out in:
Current legislation makes it possible to protect the interests of intellectual property rights holders from fraudsters who manufacture and sell counterfeit goods under the trademarks of well-known companies.
In our opinion, the only effective mechanism for influencing the counterfeit market is to create conditions under which the manufacture and sale of counterfeit products will become unattractive and unprofitable, by:
The United Arab Emirates consists of seven emirates which are Abu Dhabi (the Capital), Dubai, Ras Al Khaimah, Sharjah, Fujairah, Ajman and Umm Al Quwain, which are all part of the Federal Constitution. This constitution prescribes the relationship between the federation and each emirate, and sets out the legal framework. Federal Laws and regulations apply to all of the emirates whereas local laws and regulations are specific to each emirate and only concerns matters where the Federal Law is silent.
The UAE operates under a civil law system. The legislation is formed by codified statutes and their implementing regulations. The judiciary?s role in a civil law system is to establish the facts and apply the relevant legislation on a case by case basis, as the judgments of higher courts are not binding on lower courts. The court system does not permit the use of juries however, court sworn experts are often appointed to provide their opinion to the judge, especially in cases of a specialized subject matter. All proceedings before local courts, except special courts Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) and Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM), are conducted in Arabic and all proceedings are generally conducted by a series of written memos with little oral advocacy involved.
For counterfeiting, the federal legislation stipulates criminal, civil and administrative liability. The core provisions are in many legislations, such as:
The UAE is also party to many international treaties that relate to intellectual property such as the Berne Convention, the Paris Convention, the Rome Convention, the WIPO Copyright Treaty, Patent Cooperation Treaty, the TRIPS agreement and the Madrid agreement and protocol.
The UK?s legislative framework is well-equipped to address counterfeits in the UK. However, public resources can be stretched, particularly following the Covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, much responsibility rests with rights holders to act for themselves. However, the UK Government has just announced an ambitious 5-year plan to tackle IP crime (see Section 4: Additional Information), which is positive, and promising, news for rights holders.
The U.S. has a wide range of federal and state laws and regulations available to IP owners. The Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051 et seq., was enacted in 1946, and today defines U.S. federal trademark protection and registration rules, among other things. Unlike patents and copyrights, which are governed exclusively by federal law (although invoked by IP rights holders less frequently), individual states have also passed their own laws and regulations pertaining to trademark protection and registration. The Lanham Act provides IP owners with a wide array of enforcement claims to pursue, namely:
While there have been considerable changes to the Lanham Act aimed at bolstering trademark owners? rights and enforcement mechanisms, the most recent changes came with the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (TMA), which went into effect on December 18, 2021. The TMA gave U.S. federal trademark applicants and registrants new tools to clear the federal register of unused trademarks, reduce the number of fraudulent trademark registrations, and notably for this treatise, codified the evidentiary burden for injunctive relief in trademark infringement and counterfeiting claims to allow for a rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm upon a showing of infringement or likelihood of success on the merits.
Additionally, early in 2022, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the America COMPETES Act of 2022 (ACA), a bill containing a version of the SHOP SAFE Act of 2021 (SSA), which would amend the Lanham Act to expressly establish contributory trademark infringement liability for e-commerce platforms for sales of counterfeit products that pose a risk to consumer health and safety unless the platforms implement certain best practices, such as:
The ACA also contains The INFORM bill, which would similarly require platforms to collect identifying information like government ID and tax ID from "high-volume" third parties that sell on their platforms, defined as those who make more than 200 sales amounting to $5,000 or more in a year. While the INFORM Act and SSA have similar requirements, the purpose is slightly different, with INFORM focused on promoting product safety for consumers and the SSA focused on thwarting the distribution of counterfeits on the platforms. Neither Act would create criminal penalties, but would impose civil ones.
These further amendments to the Lanham Act, if enacted, will potentially make platforms contributorily liable and increase obligations to vet their sellers more substantially, which hopefully will curtail online counterfeiting to some degree. Moreover, requiring foreign sellers from countries that are known for substantial counterfeiting activities, such as China, to submit to the jurisdiction of U.S. courts, could deter them from engaging in unlawful conduct, give trademark owners better recourse and provide a more efficient means of service of process (potentially e-mail, messaging and publication) rather than the lengthy and costly requirements of the Hague Convention.
Uruguay is a stable country in terms of legislation protecting intellectual property rights and combatting counterfeits. The National Constitution provides that ?intellectual work, copyrights, and the inventor?s or artist?s work? shall be recognized and protected by law?.
Regarding trademark protection, Law No. 17.011, (Trademark Law) confers to the owner of a registered trademark the right of ownership and exclusive use thereof, and the possibility of preventing - before the competent authorities - unauthorized third parties from using ?(...) an unregistered trademark, identical or similar to their own?. Chapter XIV of said law, entitled ?Civil and Criminal Actions?, provides in articles 81 to 83, the criminal conducts defined by the legislator, and the corresponding punishment foreseen for those who commit such acts.
Among the latest amendments introduced is the one made by the Law No. 19355, Article 84, that introduces two important innovations: firstly, the admissibility of expert opinions as technical expertise; and, secondly, the possibility for the judge to order the destruction or donation before the sentence.
The Australian Fashion and Textile Industry includes design, textile, manufacturing, retailing, marketing, events, and education activities. It is a valuable contributor to the Australian economy and it is also an important contributor to Australia?s creative and cultural fabric. In 2021, according to a report released by the Australian Fashion Council, the Australian fashion industry contributed more than $27 billion to Australia?s economy. The Industry employs more than 489,000 people, 77% of whom are women.
The Brazilian fashion industry generates around 1.5 million of jobs and has the fifth largest textile industry in the world. In 2019, the fashion industry had a turnover of R$185.7 billion (www.abit.org.br/cont/perfil-do-setor), becoming a promising sector with new technology and sustainable developments. Notably, the fashion luxury market is growing due to an increasing number of Brazilian millionaires, which in 2010, according to Capgemini, was 86,000 (www.capgemini.com/es-es/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2019/07/World-Wealth-Report-WWR-2019.pdf).
In Brazil, ?iconization? of brands is a characteristic of the new fashion era. Trademarks are still at the center of the market interest. Trademarks in fashion are a way of communication, a way of free speech and status. Brazil has a continental dimension. Many cultural, artistic, and folkloric aspects are reflected in fashion and accessories.
However, many legal and social challenges in the productive chain are still faced in our country, such as the informality of workers, the distribution chains, or tax aspects. On the other hand, it is undeniable that the Brazilian creativity and strong exotic culture may contribute to placing Brazil first among worldwide brands (Natura is an example of this importance). Brazil is a paramount leader in beach wear and denim sectors. Designers such as Alexandre Herchcovitch or Alexandre Birman are examples of contemporary influence associated with Brazilian culture in fashion.
Fashion law in Brazil is interdisciplinary and transversal, touching many areas of the law, not only intellectual property or trademarks. Often consumer, labor, contractual, tax, corporate, advertising and even environmental law are involved.
“China” in this chapter refers to Mainland China and does not include Hong Kong SAR, Macau SAR and Taiwan.
China is now a major contributor to the world fashion industry. China has transformed from an inexpensive manufacturer into a place where every area of the fashion industry is represented. Malls in any city of substance have outlets for almost every major fashion brand in the world. This is only part of the story, however. China is now an important source of the resources that support the fashion industry: models, fabrics, design, machinery and equipment and logistical support.
In 2020 the total revenue from textile and clothes production was approximately US$210 billion; for textiles exported from China it was approximately US$153.8 billion; and for clothes exported from China, approximately US$137.4 billion. (Figures from The White Book on Intellectual Property Protection in China’s Clothing Industry, published on April 25, 2021 by Beijing Intellectual Property Judicial Protection Association in Beijing, China.)
The turnover of the Finnish textile and clothing industry was EUR 3.95 billion in 2020, and the industry employed 18,000 people in a total of 3,180 companies. The export of textiles and fashion goods out of Finland totalled EUR 648 million.
Finland has a strong track record of technical innovations, and Finnish textile innovators are ambitiously seeking to solve global climate challenges. One example of the Finnish textile industry?s carbon handprint (a measure of beneficial greenhouse gas impacts) is the production of recycled and cellulose-based textile fibres in Finland and the export of the related expertise.
Finns are known for favouring domestic brands, and consumer interest in sustainable business is clearly on the rise. Beloved consumer brands range from classics, such as Marimekko and Andiata, to newer arrivals, such as Makia.
In France, fashion remains the sector the most affected by counterfeiting activity, increasingly online. Further, its capital city Paris is known all around the world as the capital of fashion. Therefore, French law is quite protective and enforces the IP rights of the fashion industry using diverse and specific tools.
Several years ago, Oprah Winfrey asked the internationally famous fashion designer Ralph Lauren how he manages to re-invent himself in these short terms of fashion seasons. He answered bluntly: "You copy … Forty-five years of copying, that’s why I’m here." (Farkas, Nachahmungsschutz und Schutzrechtskumulation am Beispiel von Modekreationen, Baden-Baden 2016, p. 23.)
So, it seems that copying is the way to be successful in fashion industry. However, that does not mean that fashion designers copy their competitors but instead may return to old designs and styles, sometimes from several centuries ago. If this is the case, these old designs are no longer protected (if they were at all). However, in many cases designers go back only a few fashion seasons. This is the reason why Intellectual Property Rights are important to safeguard fashion designers' interests.
Creativity has always formed an integral part of the Greek culture and tradition. One need only to consider the events that have taken place in Greek historical monuments and cultural heritage sites (such as the recent Dior fashion show held at the iconic Panathenaic Stadium (Kallimarmaro) in June 2021) to understand the great influence that Greek culture has on the fashion industry at a global level.
The turnover of the Greek fashion industry was EUR 3.2 billion in 2020 (significantly lower than the average EUR 4 billion ? due to the global Covid 19 pandemic), with textile and clothing representing EUR 2.6 billion, footwear EUR 685 million and sportswear EUR 658 million.
Alongside iconic domestic brands such as Zeus & Dione, Vassilis Zoulias, Ancient Greek Sandals, Mary Katrantzou, Sophia Kokosalaki, Dimitris Dassios, Yiorgos Eleftheriades and Celia Kritharioti, there is a considerable number of emerging Greek designers dedicated to sustainable, ethical fashion, using environmentally and socially friendly manufacturing techniques and materials.
Hong Kong has long been one of the top markets for fashion goods. In recent years, the fashion industry in Hong Kong has been hit hard by social unrest and the COVID-19 outbreak. In the first three quarters in 2020, the number of tourists dropped by over 90% according to the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). On the other hand, the value of clothing export from Hong Kong fell by 34% to US$8.24 billion due to regional competition, according to the Hong Kong Trade Development Council (HKTDC) research. However, with its duty-free policy and robust IP protection regime, Hong Kong has proven to be a resilient market and has shown signs of recovery as the city starts embracing the paradigm shift to e-commerce.
Rapid growth in the global economy has placed a premium on innovation and Intellectual Property rights. There is no denying that Intellectual Property rights have served as a catalyst spurring innovation and accelerating growth. India has transitioned from a process-patent oriented system to a product-patent system using The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) as an opportunity to amend its laws and the TRIPS-compulsions as an opportunity to make giant strides in this well-known but unexplained terrain.
After Pharma, a crucial sphere of IP rights in India is the fashion industry. Although IPR attempts to tackle the emerging issues of fashion law, it will nonetheless always remain an unfinished chapter in view of the ever-expanding horizons of law.
The Irish fashion market is a mixture of foreign-owned high street stores and independent Irish designers. Many international designers, such as Louise Kennedy, Paul Costello, Simone Rocha, Peter O'Brien, and Philip Treacy are originally from Ireland.
During the last few decades, local manufacturing of fashion goods in Israel has decreased significantly, partly due to rising production costs. Simultaneously, Israeli consumers' preference for international fast-fashion brands is growing and the sales are increasingly shifting to e-commerce. At the same time, Israeli designers have been making a name for themselves internationally (for example a few years ago, a quarter of all wedding dress designers in NYC Bridal Fashion Week were Israelis).
The fashion industry in Italy generates over 80 billion Euro (8.5% of the manufacturing industry) and employs almost 500,000 people (12.5% of the workforce). In the period from 2019 to 2021 the fashion industry saw a steady and considerable growth, reporting an 8% increase in 2021, doubling the estimate based on previous years. Aside from the most notable high-end luxury brands, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) still constitute the majority of the operators in the field.
Singapore has a highly educated, tech-savvy, and digitally connected population, which has resulted in a boom in online fashion shopping. Singaporean shoppers have high expectations of the online shopping experience and an increasing number have also begun prioritising personal alignment with brand values such as sustainability and diversity.
The fashion industry is characterised by speed, transience, and obsolescence. Technological advancements have facilitated easy copying and counterfeiting, necessitating robust intellectual property protection and enforcement strategies.
This chapter introduces Singapore’s strong and reliable intellectual property regime. Singapore is well positioned in its move towards becoming a global intellectual property hub in Asia, and provides a conducive environment for intellectual property development, protection, and enforcement.
Nowadays, Spain is one of the most important countries in the fashion industry, having traditionally been at the forefront of fashion and elegance. Cristóbal Balenciaga, Pedro del Hierro, Amaya Arzuaga, Paco Rabanne, Custo Dalmau, Ágatha Ruiz de la Prada, Adolfo Domínguez, Modesto Lomba, Victorio & Lucchino and Roberto Verino: they are just some of the representatives of the fashion industry in Spain. In this context, Spain has found its place in the fashion industry thanks to companies, popular events and designers that have conquered the international market with impressive results and success. In this sense, Spain is synonymous with competitiveness, creativity and innovation and, therefore, intellectual property is a vital tool to protect fashion products in Spain.
Thailand has many attributes that make it attractive to fashion industry professionals. With a history of silk production and a start-to-finish supply chain, the country plays an important part in the global fashion industry ((for more information, see the brochures on the "Textile Industry" page of the Thailand Board of Investment website).
In order to strengthen its reputation on the world stage, Thailand has been working hard to ensure that the intellectual property (IP) rights of participants in the fashion industry are protected. The Thai Trademark Act was amended most recently in 2016 and included increased protection for non-traditional trademarks, among other modernizations. Another milestone was achieved in 2017, when Thailand joined the Madrid Protocol. In the near future, amendments to both the Thai Copyright Act and Patent Act are expected. All of these changes demonstrate that the Thai government is dedicated to ensuring that IP owners have confidence in doing business in Thailand.
As of 1 January 2021 the UK is no longer a member of the European Union. EU Regulations that were in force on 31 December 2020 were brought into English law and thus there may currently be little difference to the pre-Brexit situation. However, in the future, as EU Regulations and laws change, English law will not change but will create its own laws, thereby diverging away from European law. Hence the contents below are accurate as of 2021 but are liable to material change over the next few years.
The US fashion industry is comprised of a chain of highly valued fashion designers, manufacturers, suppliers/vendors, marketers and retailers, producing a wealth of high-end, moderate and basic products sold around the world. While the industry has traditionally been based on seasons and trends, recent advances in technology has helped propel the industry to new creative fetes, making lawyers who can keep up, not only with changing trends, but constantly changing innovation, essential. The concept of fashion law in the US is not always straightforward or easy to protect: it requires creativity and incorporates various legal disciplines, including intellectual property, advertising and marketing, contract, corporate, commercial sales, real estate, employment and international trade and customs laws. A true expert in fashion law will have a deep understanding of the industry and these concepts, but more importantly must come prepared with novel and innovative ideas for protection.
The textile and garment industry is a vital part of Vietnam’s economy, and the country has emerged as one of the top textile producers and apparel exporters in the world. Although the industry was hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic, government policy support and effective tools to protect IP rights in the fashion space are reasons for investors to be optimistic about the industry’s post-pandemic future in Vietnam.
Copyright © 2024 AttorneysGuide.co.za - All Rights Reserved.