Clients often want to achieve certain objectives with their intellectual property while at the same time seeking to preserve the confidentiality of their business plans. In those circumstances Bishop IP Investigations can act as an anonymous agent on their behalf. Such cases frequently involve the acquisition of trade marks and domain names.
However, Bishop IP also assists with a variety of other IP issues where the client does not want its name to appear on the public record. For example, we file trade mark applications, apply to revoke the registrations of others, file third party observations, acquire registered designs and even negotiate co-existence agreements on behalf of clients.
Our understanding of the underlying legal issues, particularly in relation to asset acquisitions, ensures that we can successfully fulfill our clients’ objectives. Many of the trade marks we have acquired on behalf of clients have gone on to become household brand names.
A client in the electronics sector intended to launch a new device worldwide, but a company in the United States owned trade mark registrations that were potentially conflicting. Bishop IP was instructed to approach the owner to purchase the trade marks. After two weeks of intensive negotiations between Bishop IP and the US company’s lawyers, an agreement was reached and the mark was assigned to a vehicle controlled by Bishop IP. We later transferred the mark to the client and the product was successfully launched shortly afterward.
A client was undergoing a major rebranding exercise but had not secured the generic and country code top level domains for its chosen brand. Bishop IP not only registered the majority of the available domain names in the name of an anonymous vehicle, but we also acquired domains that had already been registered by third parties. Despite significant time pressure, we managed to acquire the major gTLDs days before the new brand was launched.
A client in the sports sector wanted a new logo for one of its brands. The logo was similar to one registered for comparable goods by a third party. As the client wanted to avoid disclosing its plans, Bishop IP was instructed to approach the third party to determine whether it would object to the use of the proposed mark. After Bishop IP explained the nature of the proposed use the third party had no objection, providing the client with the comfort it was seeking.