Official blog of Patent and Law Firm “IPPro Ltd”

Geneva, May 10, 2010
PR/2010/640

The critical role of intellectual property as a tool for enabling innovation, the practical transfer of technology and industrial competitiveness were the focus of the remarks of WIPO Director General Francis Gurry to a key meeting of member states of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) in Vienna today. 

Mr. Gurry said that the intellectual property system played a key role in facilitating technology transfer by incentivizing investment in innovation, providing a framework for trading intellectual assets, and by establishing market order through marks and brands. He noted that the innovation landscape was “the subject of rapid and radical change” pointing to the intensification of investment in knowledge creation which had more than doubled in the past 15 years rising to some 1.1. trillion US dollars in 2009. 

The Director General also highlighted the rapidly changing geography of technology production, noting that China had become the third largest investor in research and development. He highlighted, in particular, the experiences of Japan, the Republic of Korea and China which have experienced sustained growth in international patent applications. In 1994, these countries together accounted for 7.6% of international patent applications filed under WIPO’s Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) rising, fifteen years later, in 2009 to 29.2%.

The Director General also referred to the dramatic shift in models of innovation, and specifically, the arrival of open and networked innovation, which he said, “offers great opportunities for developing countries to share in innovation”. He emphasized that intellectual property in its broadest sense is a mechanism for translating knowledge into commercial assets noting that the means of production of knowledge was moving from the individual to the collective and from national to international.

Mr. Gurry said that the intellectual property system offers an essential framework for defining the rights and obligations of multiple participants in collective knowledge-generation and knowledge-sharing projects. The Director General also emphasized the importance of developing the infrastructure of the international intellectual property system as a means of increasing participation in the knowledge economy and reducing the knowledge gap.

WIPO and UNIDO are currently exploring opportunities to formalize and further strengthen their cooperation to leverage their respective expertise in support of sustainable development.

From 7^th to 10^th of September, 2010 in Gostini Dvor, will be held the X Moscow international salon of innovations and investments (invention, investitio-attractive innovations, hi-technologies)

Moscow international salon of innovations and investments is one of the largest in Russia and unique scientific and technical forum of inventors, modifiers and manufacturers of hi-tech production, investment projects in scientific-technological sphere and industry.

This salon is spent with a view of assistance to development of innovative activity, to modernization of the Russian manufacture, development in market the subject matters of intellectual property, perfection of patents and licensing, association of inventors interests, developers and manufacturers of hi-tech production and representatives of industrial and financial business of the Russian Federation, and abroad countries.

Organizers of this Salon are the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, Government of Moscow, Federal governmental department «Scientific research institute — Republican research centre of scientific-consulting examinations».

We would like to invite you to participation in this X Moscow international salon of innovations and investments: both Russian & foreign scientific organizations and industrial enterprises, governmental science centers, institutes of  Russian Sciences Academy, higher educational institutions, organizations and complex of defense-industrial enterprises, small innovative business enterprises, patent owners of perspective inventions, inventors, innovative projects initiators, representatives of enterprise circles who are interested in receiving commercial result from realization of competitive high technology production and innovative technologies; funds, techno-parks, innovative-technological centers, centers of international scientific and technical and innovative cooperation; venture funds, financial and consulting structures, which activity are assumed by participation in financing, realization and support of innovative high technology projects.

Majority of people know about the existence of intellectual property (IP), copyright, patents, industrial designs and trademarks in particular. However many still consider that these concepts are related to the sphere of business & rights and are insignificant for their day-to-day life. For eliminating this lack in 2000, the state-members of WIPO, have decided to form and to celebrate annually the International day of intellectual property. For this purpose they have chosen 26^th of April–the day, when in 1970 the WIPO’s Convention establishment has come into force.

WIPO and its member-states annually celebrate the International day of intellectual property, holding meetings planned for this date, events and campaigns. Their purpose – is to achieve the best understanding in general public, what really represents IP, and to show, how the IP-system promotes not only development in music, art and show business, but also in creation of all products and innovative technologies which define the world surrounding us.

On April, 26th, 2010 WIPO celebrates the 10th anniversary of intellectual property’s International day. Theme of this anniversary year of IP International day is:

Innovations – Connecting the world

Couple of decades ago, to majority of people the world seemed huge and in many respects to be unknown. Knowledge was committed to paper, and it was very difficult to exchange them. Outside of cities access to foreign culture and art has been limited.

Rapid growth of innovations and their global use have changed our outlook. In limited hours we can hey-through continents. Almost from any part our globe we can access any information, using such compact devices that can go fit on our palm. The universal communication supported of web- and wireless technologies, has a great significance on the future. Noegenesis on the basis of world-wide web releases intellectual potential before the isolated societies, helping to reduce rupture in knowledge between nations. Modern means of videoconference technology reduces the necessity for business trips, reducing our carbon "prints". Mobile telephones already changed our life and society: mobile communication working on solar energy helps to find out diseases, which were earlier out of striking distances.

Quick processing and data exchange accelerates innovative cycle, promoting collective innovations and mutually advantageous cooperation between companies, research institutions and separate individuals. An innovative technology really creates a global society. The intellectual property system is a part of this binding process. It promotes information interchange, in particular, providing access to the file of technological know-how containing in free WIPO databases. It provides structure for trade and distribution of technologies. It offers initiatives for innovations and competition. It helps to build-up cooperation necessary for the decision of essential global problems which we face-such as climatic change and spiral requirement for energy.

Therefore WIPO is urged to ensure access, so that the intellectual property system continued to serve the most important purpose to encouragement innovations & creativity and so that the advantages of this system became accessible to everything, helping to put together the world.

From 12^th of May 2010 onwards starts the second stage of priority registration of domains.РФ in which in course will become accessible to trademark-owners whose trademarks contain a verbal part of its symbols, distinct from Cyrillic.

We accept advance orders on registration of domain names.РФ from this category of legal-owners.

Clients, filed with the advanced orders, can register their chosen domain name by 12^th May; in case if there will be no other applications from other users. Domains, for registration with more then one applicant for the same trademark, will be exposed for special closed auction.

From 15^th July’10, the following persons/entries for domain-name can also be registered in the domain.РФ on priority basis:

• Owners of rights to company names;

• Owners of exclusive rights to the use of place origin name for goods;

• Noncommercial organizations;

• Mass-media communication.

Federal official department «Federal institute of industrial property of the Federal Agency of intellectual property, patents and trade marks»

(FGU FIPS)

The work purpose is propagation of invention and assistance to advancement of the Russian work-outs on the domestic and world markets by database replenishment «Perspective inventions» on the site of Rospatent and FGU FIPS in the Internet-network and uses of the information on inventions from this database for formation of the Russian expositions with the assistance of Rospatent and FGU FIPS in the International exhibitions and salons of inventions, new techniques and technologies held in the Russian Federation and abroad, for formation and publication collection «Priority directions in development of science and technologies and perspective inventions», in various specialized magazines, including magazine "Intellectual property".

Work consists in analysis of application materials and selection of inventions satisfying following criteria:

1. Conformity to priority directions in development of  science and technologies in the Russian Federation, defined by Bases of a policy of the Russian Federation in the field of development of science and technologies for the period till 2010 and further prospect, confirmed by the President of the Russian Federation on March, 30th, 2002 N Pr-576, and since 2007 to the Federal target program «Scientifically-technological base of Russia» for 2007-2012, providing the accelerated formation of technological potential according to national priorities of technological development.

Priority directions of development of a science, technologies and techniques

1) Safety and counteraction to terrorism

2) Live systems

3) Industry nano-system and materials

4) information-telecommunication systems

5) Perspective arms, military and special techniques

6) Rational wildlife management

7) Transport, aviation and space systems

8) Power and power savings

Each of priority directions includes extensive area of researches and work-outs both fundamental, and search-applied character and includes critical technologies, work-outs and which use are directed on maintenance of interests of the state in sphere of national safety, economic and social development.

The list of critical technologies of the Russian Federation

 1. Base and critical military, special and industrial technologies

 2. Bio-information technology

 3. Bio-catalytic, biosynthetic and bio-touch technologies

 4. Biomedical and veterinary technologies of life-support and protection of the person and animals

 5. Generic and post-generic technologies of creation of medical products

 6. Cellular technologies

 7. Nanotechnology and technologies of creation nanomaterials

 8. Technologies of atomic engineering, nuclear fuel cycle, safe handling of radioactive waste and fulfilled nuclear fuel

 9. Technologies of bioengineering

10. Technologies of hydrogen power

11. Technologies mechanotronics and creations of Microsystems techniques

12. Technologies of monitoring and forecasting conditions of atmosphere and hydrosphere

13. Technologies of new and renewed energy sources

14. Technologies of maintenance of protection and ability to live of population and dangerous objects at threats of terrorist displays

15. Technologies of processing, storage, transfer and information protection

16. Technologies of an estimation of resources and condition forecasting lithospheres and biospheres

17. Technologies of processing and recycling of technogenics formations and waste

18. "Know-how" of metals and alloys with the special properties, used by arms and military technology manufacture

19. Software "know-how"

20. "Know-how" fuel and energy from organic raw materials

21. Technologies of distributed calculations and systems

22. Technologies of decrease in risk and consequences reduction of natural and technogenics accidents

23. Technologies of creation of biocompatible materials

24. Technologies of creation of intellectual systems of navigation and management

25. Technologies of creation and processing of composite and ceramic materials

26. Technologies of creation and processing of crystal materials

27. Technologies of creation and processing of polymers and elastomer

28. Technologies of creation of new kinds of transport systems and managements

29. Technologies of creation of membranes and catalytical systems

30. Technologies of creation of new generations of space-rocket, aviation and sea techniques

31. Technologies of creation of electronic componential base

32. Technologies of creation of power saving up systems of transportation, distribution and heat and electric power consumption

33. Technologies of creation of power effective engines and propelling device for transport systems

34. Technologies ecologically safe resource-conserving manufactures and processing of agricultural raw materials and foodstuff

35. Technologies of ecologically safe working out of deposits and mining operations

1. Conformity to federal and departmental programs of technological re-equipment of the high technology directions in a national economy, being in full or in part in sphere of the state responsibility: the nuclear, space, aviation industry, separate sectors of defense-industrial complex, etc.;
2. Trail invention
3. A high technological level of invention in comparison with world analogues
4. Originality of  technical decision
5. Urgency of the problem solved in the invention
6. Ready for use in manufacture
7. Useful in manufacture
8. Economic benefit

«Trail» invention - an outstanding invention to which in world practice the prototype did not precede, it opens new branch of science and techniques.

Example of trail inventions were: penicillin, plastic, laser-ray, synthesis of diamonds, etc.

To inventions having a high technological level, inventions concerning new directions of science and technicians can be carried; inventions corresponding to world level, and also inventions of diversified use.

The urgency of the problem solved in the invention, is estimated on its conformity to priority problems of economy, ecology and social policy, for example, improvement of quality and competitiveness of let out production, economy material and power resources, preservation of the environment, improvement of working conditions etc.

The conclusion about sufficient technical проработанности the invention and its readiness for use in manufacture can be made on presence in application materials of drawings of the invention, results of tests or results of trial approbation.

Invention, satisfying to criterion at least to one of the criteria listed in items 1 - 9, can be recognized by "perspective".

Order

Works on revealing and selection of perspective inventions

For work carried-out branch expert departments (further - expert department) select perspective inventions from among domestic fillings for inventions on which the decision on patent delivery is accepted. Thus simultaneously at the direction the expert department sends the applicant of the decision on patent delivery the letter, questionnaire, letter-order and the list of priority directions of development of science, techniques and technologies and critical technologies.

Cover of each business application recognized by the expert department perspective, expert marks "П".

The expert department monthly represents to department of economy of industrial property (department 45) lists of numbers of selected applications carried by them to the perspective.

The department 45 after reception of answer of the applicant containing the request for inclusion of its invention in a database «Perspective inventions» prepares about it the information for consideration on Commission created according to the Order on Rospatent from 7/4/2006 № 74. Commission sessions are spent not less often than once quarterly.

After acceptance by the Commission of corresponding decision to the patent-owner, the department 45 sends a letter about it.

The department 45 conducts and quarterly represents to Branch of work-outs of automated systems FGU FIPS of data on the selected perspective inventions for database replenishment "Perspective inventions" on the machine-readable carrier and in the Internet networks.

NEW YORK, NY – March 2010 – The International Trademark Association (INTA) today announced its support for President Barack Obama as he underscores the importance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and the United States’ commitment to protecting businesses and consumers around the world from intellectual property infringement.

The letter of support, highlights the fact that a strong economic future with sustained job growth, combined with tough intellectual property protections, will guard businesses and consumers in the global marketplace.

“The entire trademark community is pleased to see that President Obama has made the case for increasing protections for brand owners and consumers a top priority. Once complete, we are confident that ACTA will be a meaningful treaty that will increase protection against counterfeit products that threaten the health and safety of consumers,” said INTA Executive Director, Alan Drewsen.

About ACTA
In late 2007, in recognition of increasing challenges to combating counterfeiting and piracy, Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, Switzerland and the United States announced that they would begin negotiations on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, known as ACTA – a plurilateral agreement intended to establish a stronger set of common standards for intellectual property enforcement among the signatories of the Agreement.

INTA has expressed support for the general principles and objectives of ACTA, and in cooperation with the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has coordinated the effort of more than twenty national, regional and international industry associations, many of which are based in the negotiating countries, to provide the business perspective on topics under discussion by ACTA negotiators. The group has urged negotiators to deliver an agreement that will significantly improve the international enforcement by establishing stronger standards for government performance and more effective national regimes for protecting intellectual property rights.

In and on behalf of

Patent and law firm IPPro

Geneva, March 2010
PR/2010/634

International trademark filings under WIPO’s Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks (“the Madrid system”) dropped by 16% in 2009 as a result of the global economic downturn, though increases were observed among some major users of the system, notably the European Union (EU) (3.1%) and Japan (2.7%), as well as in the Republic of Korea (ROK) (+33.9%), Singapore (+20.5%), Croatia (+17.5%) and Hungary (+14.5%). 

WIPO received 35,195 international applications under the 84-member Madrid system compared to 42,075 in 2008.  Similarly, international trademark registrations were down 12% on 2008 with a total 35,925 international registrations in 2009.  Trademark registrations reflect the introduction of new products and services to the market and are sensitive to business cycles.  The comparatively smaller decrease (-1.2%) in the renewal of international trademark registrations, compared to 2008, reflects the value of established brands at a time when consumers opt for goods that are tried and trusted.  In 2009, 19,234 international trademark renewals were recorded.

Regional and National Filing Trends

The EU accounted for over half of the international applications received – some 21,824 - in 2009.  This includes international applications filed through national trademark offices of the countries concerned and those filed through the Office of Harmonization for the Internal Market (OHIM) – applicants from the EU may opt to file through their national office or through OHIM.  Some 3,710 international applications were filed through OHIM in 2009 representing a 3.1% increase on figures for 2008. 

Marked declines in the filing of international trademark applications were evident in a number of countries in 2009, including the Czech Republic (-34.6%), Sweden (-34%), Italy (‑32.2%), Spain (‑29.9%), Denmark (-27.1%), Benelux (-26.2%), and Germany (-22.9%). Significant decreases were also recorded in international applications received from France (-16.5%), Austria (-15.7%), China (‑14.3%), the United Kingdom (-13.3%), the United States of America (USA) (-13.1%) and the Russian Federation (-10.3%).  

Top Designated Countries

Madrid Union members were notified of 303,344 new designations (contained in new registrations or territorial extensions) in 2009, representing a 20% decrease compared to 2008 again reflecting the generally flat global economic conditions.  When submitting an international trademark application, applicants must designate those member states in which they want their mark to be protected.  Applicants can also extend the effects of an international registration to other members at a later date by filing a subsequent designation.  In this way, the holder of an international registration can expand the geographical scope of the protection of a mark in line with evolving business needs.

The top six in the ranking of most designated member states remained unchanged.  China (with 14,766 designations) continues to be the most designated country, followed by the Russian Federation, USA, Switzerland, the European Union and Japan.

The number of designations fell in all designated contracting parties, although a number of countries moved up the list of 40 most designated contracting parties.  For example, Viet Nam moved from 24th to 21st position, Bosnia and Herzegovina from 33rd to 26th position, Azerbaijan from 36th to 32nd position, Georgia (from 35th to 33rd position) and Albania (from 40th to 35th position).  Two countries entered the top 40 most designated countries in 2009, namely, Iran (37th) and Egypt (39th).

Active International Registrations

Over half a million (515,562) international registrations were active in the International Register at the end of 2009, containing some 5.6 million active designations and representing a 2.4% increase relative to 2008.  These registrations belong to 169,939 right holders who are mostly small and medium-sized enterprises.

Membership of the Madrid System

The total number of member states of the Madrid system (governed by the Madrid Agreement (1891) and the Madrid Protocol (1989)) remains 84. After the ratification of the Madrid Protocol by Egypt, and the accession to the Protocol by Liberia and Sudan, the number of contracting parties of the Protocol has risen to 81.  This means that now only three countries are bound by the Madrid Agreement only.  An expanding membership and an ever wider geographical spread of the system make it a more attractive option for businesses operating in international markets. 

Of the total number of international applications filed in 2009, 35.7% were transmitted to WIPO electronically; the transmitting trademark offices were those of Australia, Benelux, EU, Republic of Korea, Switzerland and the USA.

In and on behalf of

Mr.Samir, IPPro

Geneva, March 23, 2010
PR/2010/635

Demand for WIPO’s dispute resolution services, in particular relating to cyber squatting cases, continued in 2009 with trademark holders filing 2,107 complaints under procedures based on the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), which at WIPO became a paperless operation at the end of 2009. While this caseload represents a 9.5% decrease over 2008, it covers the highest number of individual domain names in a given year (4,688) since the UDRP - a quick and cost effective way of addressing allegations of cyber squatting - was launched ten years ago.

Since the UDRP’s launch in December 1999, the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the Center) has received more than 17,000 UDRP-based cases. A total of some 31,000 domain names covering both generic and country code Top Level Domains (gTLDs and ccTLDs) have been handled by WIPO.

The UDRP has become accepted as an international standard for resolving domain name disputes outside traditional courts. Proposed by WIPO in 1999, it is designed specifically to discourage and resolve the abusive registration of trademarks as domain names, commonly known as cyber squatting.

Commenting on the success of the UDRP, WIPO Director General Francis Gurry said, “The UDRP has proven to be a pioneering and globally applicable low-cost alternative to court litigation. It offers a practical solution to the abusive registration of trademarks as domain names, a very real issue where the practical effect, legal status and desired outcome are normally not confined to any particular location,” said Mr. Gurry.

“Another key element of the UDRP’s popularity is the straightforward enforcement of panel decisions, without need for further judicial intervention, although this still remains an option. The UDRP can provide inspiration for alternative self-regulation in areas of commerce and other human activity that cross jurisdictional borders,” said Mr. Gurry. He noted, in particular, the relevance of a UDRP-type approach to resolving disputes arising from a range of uses of identity on the Internet, such as on social networking sites, auction platforms and in search engines.

Parties based in 114 countries were named in WIPO cases in 2009, up 10% on the previous year, reflecting the global reach of cyber squatting and WIPO’s services. In 2009, the Inter-Continental Hotel Group filed the largest UDRP dispute on record, involving 1,542 domain names in a single WIPO case.

Cases in 2009 were handled by 310 WIPO panelists from 46 countries. Although down 2% from 2008, English remained the most common language for WIPO proceedings (84%), largely because the majority of domain names involved were registered with US-based registrars.

Cases were also processed in 13 other languages, including (in order of frequency) Spanish, French, Dutch, German, Chinese, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Swedish, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, and Turkish. The character set of the disputed domain names themselves remained overwhelmingly ASCII (English alphabet), with a small number of domain names in Chinese, Danish, French, German, Turkish and Spanish.

The United States of America (USA), France, the United Kingdom (UK), Germany, Switzerland and Spain remained the most frequent bases for complainants through 2009. The USA, UK, China, Canada, Spain, and the Republic of Korea were cited most frequently as respondents in alleged cyber squatting cases.

Among Top Level Domains, the .com gTLD remained the solid leader in terms of the number of domain names featuring in WIPO cases (87%).

Almost 24% of all cases filed in 2009 were settled prior to a panel decision. Of the remainder, 87% of the panel decisions ordered the transfer of the domain name(s) to the complainant (or cancellation of the name), and 13% denied the complaints, leaving the names in the possession of the registration holder.

Updated WIPO Precedent Tools

In 2009, the Center further enhanced its globally-consulted WIPO Legal Index of panel decisions by adding new search categories that track developments in case jurisprudence and reflect the evolution of domain name practices. New categories include Timing of rights; Pay-per-click and other landing pages; Prior knowledge/Notice of mark; Willful blindness; Constructive notice; Knew or should have known; Registrant search obligation.

The WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions helps to ensure the consistency of WIPO UDRP filing and jurisprudence by distilling the Center’s cases and describing panel positions on important case issues. An updated Overview of WIPO Panel Views is under preparation and is expected to be available by mid 2010.

PS.    Stage of registration priority in the domain.РФ is been prolonged

        The Council of Coordination centre for national domain in the network had decided to prolong the Internet stage of registration priority in the new Russia national domain.РФ till 11^th of May 2010.

       Shortly the Council of Coordination centre will confirm the new position about registration priority, and then the second stage of registration priority for the domain.РФ will be opened.

In and on behalf of

Mr.Samir, IPPro

Active commercial websites owned by people and entities that conceal their identity and whereabouts by providing false information (often with the exception of a valid e-mail address), and/or by using proxy services that shield such information from public disclosure (hereafter, “fictitiously owned commercial websites”) threaten the ability to serve judicial documents swiftly (and therefore to institute legal action swiftly, if at all).  Therefore, the prevalence of fictitiously owned commercial websites has resulted in increased abuses of intellectual property, online fraud and other illegal schemes, resulting in decreased consumer confidence in the stability and security of the Internet marketplace.

In 2007, the INTA Anti-Counterfeiting & Enforcement Committee (ACEC) contacted the INTA Internet Committee for its input on various policy proposals, including the feasibility of requiring domain owners to appoint an agent for service of process. The Internet Committee responded with the suggestion that national laws could be amended to allow for service of process through the contact points found in the Whois database.  The ACEC accepted this recommendation which was included in its report to the Board in May of 2008.

In mid 2008, the proposal was referred to the Whois Subcommittee of the Internet Committee for further development and consideration. And in January 2009, the Electronic Service Working Group was formed from members of the Whois Subcommittee, with additional members from the Courts and Tribunals Subcommittee of the INTA Enforcement Committee.

The resulting report, Substituted Service of Process by Electronic Mail: Achieving Notice on Fictitious Owners of Commercial Websites for Access to Judicial Remedies, considers the prospects for streamlining the process necessary before an aggrieved party may undertake substituted service of process on the hidden owner of a commercial web site by electronic mail. 

In September of 2009, the subcommittee’s proposal was presented to the INTA Policy Development & Advocacy Executive Council and the INTA Board of Directors Executive Committee and in November 2009 to the INTA Board of Directors taking a position on the issue:

1)  Should the recommendation be limited to trademark infringement and cyber squatting cases?

2)  What effect would the proposal have on non-trademark claims involving fictitiously owned commercial web sites?

3)  Would other legal organizations and stakeholders support and/or have changes to the proposal?

Mr. Samir Rahman

On & in behalf of

Patent and Law firm ‘IPPro’

Trademark community warns consumers to buy genuine goods

NEW YORK, NY – March  2010 – International Trademark Association (INTA) today issued a warning to football fans hoping to buy official Super Bowl gear and offered tips on how to spot fake merchandise.

Counterfeiters are planning on taking advantage of loyal NFL enthusiasts this year, and INTA is committed to raising awareness on these fake goods and apparel. Illegal counterfeit goods promote child labor and fund organized crime. Counterfeit and knock-off goods also use sub-par materials that leave consumers with second-rate merchandise and take away jobs from legitimate manufacturers.

To help fans, INTA has compiled tips on what to look for when purchasing Super Bowl apparel and merchandise. Consumers should:

1. Shop in established stores and be wary of street and out-of-trunk vendors.

2. Research goods beforehand to know exactly what they want.

3. Not buy items of poor quality that have irregular stitching or uneven coloring.

4. Avoid items without an authentic logo or with an awkward looking label.

5. Not buy items with prices that are uncharacteristically low.

According to federal, state and local authorities, there were approximately 1,000 pieces of counterfeit NFL goods and a million dollars worth of non-NFL fakes sold illegally at last Super Bowl.

“In this troubled economy, it’s only natural for consumers to look for the best deals around. But when it comes to Super Bowl Sunday and authentic NFL gear, we urge consumers to buy from authorized retailers and trusted stores. Looking back, you’ll be glad that you purchased real merchandise to remember the 2010 Super Bowl,” said INTA Executive Director, Alan C. Drewsen.

On & in behalf of

Patent and Law firm ‘IPPro’