Hechanova Group continues to contribute to the advancement of legal scholarship through its written works on innovations within the intellectual property profession.
This country-specific Q&A provides an overview of Life Sciences laws and regulations applicable in Philippines.
Editha R Hechanova, Brenda P Rivera, and Maricris V Faderugao of Hechanova Group examine new trademark and patent representative rules aimed at professionalising intellectual property services and aligning with global standards.
Some of us get bored using the default ringtones in our mobile phones, so we buy something that would be more exciting, from the meowing of a Siamese cat to a line from a favorite song, to express our personality or to easily identify people who are calling.
The Philippines is signatory to the following IP treaties: Madrid Protocol, World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) Copyright Treaty, WIPO Performance and Phonograms, Patent Co-operation Treaty, Rome Convention, Budapest Treaty, WIPO Establishment Convention, Paris Convention, and Trade Related Aspects of IP Rights (TRIPS Agreement).
As the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines invites public comments on a proposal to streamline the adjudication of intellectual property violation cases
Editha R Hechanova of Hechanova Group explains the main points to note for parties entering mediation to resolve an intellectual property dispute in the Philippines.
Editha Hechanova of Hechanova Group reports on the decision on a petition brought by the former stars of the long-running Philippine show ‘Eat Bulaga!’ concerning ownership of the associated mark.
A register of recognised trademark representatives is among the potential changes summarised by Editha Hechanova of Hechanova Group under a proposal that is designed to bring greater clarity to trademark prosecution.
A quick look at the essentials of patent prosecution in Philippines, including key disclosure requirements for patent applications, expedited procedures, oppositions, timeframes and costs.
Panoramic guide (formerly Getting the Deal Through) enabling side-by-side comparison of local insights into patent litigation and patent office procedures
To guide both trademark practitioners and applicants in determining the registrability risk that they may face in the prosecution of their applications, the following cases may provide some enlightenment as to the nature of the cases appealed by the applicant to the Office of the Director General (ODG).
For the second time, the Supreme Court of the Philippines has urged the Philippines Congress and the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) to amend RA 8293 or the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines (IP Code)
The Philippine economy has shifted up a gear as a growing middle class flexes its online buying power. Laws are being rolled out to protect this resource.
To enforce its rights against an infringer, a patent owner, or anyone possessing any right, title or interest to the patented invention, may file an administrative action with the Bureau of Legal Affairs (BLA) of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) or a civil action with a regional trial court (RTC).
A forged deed of assignment, even if registered with the relevant government office, does not confer rights to the assignee due to lack of consent of the copyright owner
Salustiana D. Ty Tower 104 Paseo de Roxas Ave., Makati, 1229 Metro Manila Philippines
[email protected]
+63 2 8888-4293 ; +63 2 8893-4878
+63 2 8893-5553 ; +63 2 8812-6561
