Showing posts with label cipro. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cipro. Show all posts

Wednesday, 4 May 2011

Darren Olivier

CIPC gets underway

1 May was a public holiday in RSA and in other countries too but not for CIPRO. It was the day of the merger of OCIPE with CIPRO, to form the CIPC and the implementation of the new Companies legislation said to have a profound impact on the way in which companies operate in South Africa.


The new look website is located here and a summary of its goals here.

The majority of the changes are not directly related to IP legislation. As reported earlier, there are changes to the way in which way in which company names may be objected to and the Commission boasts of new enforcement powers which, when one reads the relevant legislation, appear to be quite limited as far as IP rights (as opposed to Companies legislation) enforcement is concerned. The website has specific headings dedicated to Enforcement and Remedies and Intellectual Property Enforcement that both promote ADR but are otherwise fairly generic.

Posted by Darren
Read More

Tuesday, 19 April 2011

Darren Olivier

OCIPE - more than a rebrand but doubts remain

The new Companies and Intellectual Property Commission was official launched in Midrand yesterday by the Trade and Industry Department spearheaded by Minister Rob Davies, who described the move as a milestone in the regulation of companies and business entities in South Africa according to a press release from the Government Communication and Information System, which goes on to say:

With significantly expanded functions and powers, the new commission will combine the Office of Companies and Intellectual Property Enforcement (OCIPE) and Companies and Intellectual Property Registration Office (CIPRO). It is expected to guide the implementation of the new Companies Act, which comes into effect in May.


Administrative functions currently assigned to the minister under the Companies Act, are to be placed within the jurisdiction of the commission and it will act as an autonomous statutory body outside the public service.


"I'm satisfied that the commission is in a state of readiness ... [I] am convinced it is a better step for South Africa ... When we bring into force this legislation, we will be bringing to South Africans top notch legislation," Davies said.


He said the commission and the Act will simplify the process of company registration, as well as mordenise business administration.


"We need to move from where we are in the interest of good governance and this piece of legislation will help us in this regard. As we implement, we will sort out any problems that may arise. We will learn by doing," said the minister.


The Act also introduces a number of new responsibilities, which CIPRO currently does not perform, but will be performed by the new commission. These include pro-active enforcement measures by way of compliance notices served on defaulting companies, investigations of all complaints and contraventions of the Act and investigating the affairs of companies.


Davies denounced criticism that the new commission would be CIPRO - just under a new name. "Our intention is to actually ease processes so it won't be business as usual. We are aware that there will be challenges at first but what we can assure businesspeople is that things will be totally different from now on."


The process of reorganising CIPRO and retraining of staff had taken more than a year of intensive work, according to the department's Deputy Director General, Zodwa Ntuli.


The department's former Deputy Director General Astrid Ludin has been appointed to lead the commission and will be assisted by several deputy commissioners.


Ludin said: "The challenge for the commission will be to make sure that we have systems in place that will ensure that we deliver on the simplicity that we promise to companies. Together, we will work hard to achieve an institution that will be a vehicle for business enterprises in this country."

--------------

Coincidentally, yesterday Afro Leo spent an hour with colleagues discussing the effect of the new legislation and Commission on the company name objection process, a crucial part of a company's IP policy. Until this legislation was in place CIPRO did not cross-check against the trade mark register when company names were requested. This is set to change but there are questions on whether OCIPE has the manpower and resource to do this effectively. Companies are expected to maintain their name objection watches.

Other changes include the scrapping of time limits to company name objection procedures, an update on the grounds of cancellation and a change to process for reserving and approving names. Click here for more information. Perhaps a reader could tell us whether OCIPE is itself a registered trade mark.
Read More

Friday, 26 November 2010

Darren Olivier

CIPRO's Trade Mark Division - the inside track

CIPRO has suffered the recent passing of its CEO and has been embattled by criticism against certain Divisions, yet its Trade Mark Division has managed to get examination times down to 7-8 months from filing and reduced a significant backlog in issuing registration certificates. Recently, whilst putting together his firm's IP Crammer seminar, Afro Leo had the opportunity to catch up with the Senior Manager (Registrar) : Trade Marks at CIPRO - Fleurette Coetzee, to ask her about these achievements. Fleurette also spoke openly about CIPRO's relationship with law firms and the SAIIPL.

For the benefit of readers and with the kind permission of CIPRO, the questions and answers can be located here.

Read More

Monday, 4 October 2010

Darren Olivier

Has the The Gap highlighted a gap?

The Constitutional Court (right) has issued a caution to judges who take shortcuts in delivering decisions by, for example, cutting and pasting heads of argument. This latest decision has bubbled up from that potjie (cauldron) of disputes over rights to The Gap trade mark in South Africa - click here and here for a refresher. Afro Leo questions whether this decision is just symptomatic of a greater challenge in the dispute resolution system in RSA.

The decision is over an application for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court to contest an order against the refusal by a High Court judge (Basson J) to recuse himself after he had handed down judgment in 2007.

"The recusal application was based on the contention that the main judgment exhibited little or no sign of any original or independent application and reasoning, that it essentially copied the written heads of argument of Salt’s counsel and, consequently, created a perception of bias in favour of Salt. Basson J refused to recuse himself. The Full Court dismissed the appeal against his refusal. The present application seeks to have the recusal issue reconsidered on appeal by this Court."

The 9! judge bench refused the application because they felt that it would have no practical effect (see the peculiar facts at para 7) but not before quoting former Chief Justice Corbett:

“The true test of a correct decision is when one is able to formulate convincing reasons (and reasons which convince oneself) justifying it. And there is no better discipline for a judge than writing (or giving orally) such reasons. It is only when one does so that it becomes clear whether all the necessary links in a chain of reasoning are present; whether inferences drawn . . . are properly drawn; whether the relevant principles of law are what you thought them to be; whether or not counsel’s argument is as well founded as it appeared to be at the hearing (or the converse); and so on.

The very act of having to summarize in one’s own words what a witness has said, or what is stated in an affidavit or what a document says or provides, is in itself a very good discipline and is conducive to a better and more accurate understanding of the case.”

As astute as these comments are, the reality is that judgements can take a significant amount of time to be handed down in the High Court and the reason oft cited is the enormous workload on the judges. It is also somewhat ironic (and appropriate too) that this decision arises from The Gap litigation which has itself worked through South African courts for almost 15 years, with numerous delays along the way. This judgement, for example, is three years post the original decision.

Afro IP has illustrated, for example, how the ASA has begun to usurp the Court as a forum for trade dress disputes because it is accessible, relatively inexpensive (but not cheap) and above all, quick. On the other hand speed cannot be dispensed with at the expense of quality. In 2009, 3 out of 4 High Court decisions on IP were reversed on appeal to the SCA and in Afro Leo's opinion a number of others would have too, had they gone on appeal.

Is it too that the very fact that The Gap litigation has been ongoing for as long as it has, also symptomatic of a system that does not appear do enough to incentivise settlement at an early stage? Why is it that it is more beneficial to litigate for over a decade in our courts than to settle? Why is it beneficial for The Gap to take this matter to a 9 judge sitting in the Constitutional Court when, according to the CC, a decision would have no practical effect?

In my experience, it is often the delay and risk that accompanies litigation that encourages litigants to settle rather than any positive dis-incentives (eg high cost orders) or incentives (mediation or arbitration) in legislation designed to avoid litigation. Cost can be a deterrent too but RSA is still a relatively cheap place to litigate especially when compared to the UK and USA and there is a need to ensure that litigation is not only for big brand owners by making litigation accessible to SME budgets. The situation is complex.

To be fair to those litigating over the Gap trade mark, earlier judgements have not created sufficient clarity over the respective rights and the very nature of a user rights system is that rights ebb and flow with reputation and goodwill. It is also not uncommon for intense litigation over trade mark rights to extend over long periods of time, as illustrated by the Bud wars.

Trade mark oppositions can also be a very effective "alternative dispute resolution" forum to full scale litigation in the High Courts because they deal with similar issues to trade mark infringement and are generally cheaper. In the UK for example, brand owners frequently push disputes (where appropriate) into the opposition forum for this very reason. For CIPRO this is a big opportunity because there is a market that will pay for the effort in creating a quick and effective opposition dispute resolution centre.
Read More

Monday, 23 August 2010

Darren Olivier

Latest patent case - SARU sued for infringement

CBS Evening News carries a revealing story on the effect of the backlog of 700,000 patent applications awaiting examination at the US Patent and Trade Mark Office (USPTO) - "It represents innovations trapped in this agency that otherwise could be creating jobs" - at a time when the US and, let's face it, world economy needs it most.

CIPRO, the South African patent office, which registers around 12,000 patents and 30,000 trade marks per year year suffers its own backlogs. Although improvements have been reported recently, trade mark applications typically take several years to become registered. Patents, on the other hand, are granted relatively quickly in South Africa, primarily because substantive examination does not take place.

South Africa operates a deposit system for patents; patents are not examined for novelty, obviousness or utility. Consequently, the strength of patent rights are often only tested when the patent is relied on in an infringement case. This also means that a number of cases get embroiled in costly and time consuming pre-merit patent amendment squabbles. This latest patent case between Audiosport International (Pty) Ltd v Soundsure CC and the SA Rugby Union is an example of one of these pre merit squabbles, involving a dispute over a broadcast system.

During November 2008 Audiosport instituted an action for damages against the respondents based on their infringement prior to the expiration their patent. The respondents defended the action counterclaiming for the revocation of the patent on the grounds that it was invalid for lack of novelty or lack of an inventive step. The respondents relied on two prior art documents, US patent no 4, 097, 809 and US patent no 2, 710, 345. The case deals not with the merits of the counterclaim or the infringement but about whether Audiosport could amend their expired patent to more clearly avoid the prior art and lengthy arguments about invalidity at the main hearing. The respondents opposed the amendment on the basis that it was not possible to amend an expired patent.

The Judge concluded that after the term of a patent has expired a patent does not cease to have legal force and effect (he held that for purposes of a claim for damages for infringement the patent still has legal force) and held therefore the other provisions of the Act relating to revocation and amendment continue to apply. In other words, Audiosport could amend their expired patent.

The case, arguably, would not have been necessary if a patent examination system was in place prior to grant. Whilst there are very good reasons why RSA must have a deposit system, the case does illustrate that amending patents can lead to delays and increased costs in enforcing a patent right in South Africa. Thus while the RSA patent system does not suffer the delay problems of the US system, it does somewhat defer issues to the enforcement stage. One way of avoiding this delay (if the patent is also applied for in the US or Europe) would be to amend a patent earlier taking the benefit of examination reports from those Registries and without the scrutiny of an alleged infringer's legal counsel.

Getting back to the CBS story, it is noteworthy that the USPTO recognises the direct correlation between its own delays, innovation and job creation. A reminder of just how important patent and trade mark offices are.
Read More

Monday, 19 July 2010

Darren Olivier

Can Cipro do a Louis?

South Africa's embattled Companies and Intellectual Property Registration Office (Cipro) confirmed on Wednesday that, as from July 14, 2010, certified copies of identity documents would be required for all future applications and transactions. Creamer Media carries the story of how Cipro is trying to tackle corruption here.

Meanwhile, users of Cipro's services ranked it stone last in a recent performance study undertaken by John Olsen and Nicholas Bolter of EAPD and published in Managing Intellectual Property here. The blog has published much of the criticism of Cipro's services over the last few years and also visited Cipro's offices for more information. There is a genuine attempt to improve performance at the Office and Afro Leo knows how disappointed some of the staff will be on learning of this study. One just gets the feeling that they need much more support and resource, and are hampered by a government that does not appear to truly recognise the crucial importance of the Office as a gateway to business in RSA and its role in generating a knowledge based economy.

On a more celebratory note, with unassuming African Louis Oosthuizen winning the Open Championship on Madiba's birthday yesterday, one wonders if the number 57 and "Shrek", which seem to be distinctive features of his persona, will be exploited by his management company taking advantage of his new found fame in the coming months. If they do then Cipro will be asked to look after his rights in RSA.
Read More

Wednesday, 10 March 2010

Darren Olivier

Single colour difficulties before the ASA - Pritt

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ruled against Henkel AG, the producer of the well known PRITT glue stick, in a dispute with Trefoil Manufacturing over the colour of its glue stick. In essence, the ASA has said Henkel AG has no exclusive rights in South Africa to the red of its glue stick and the advertising associated with the product. Local IP dispute expert Carl Van Rooyen is heavily quoted in Supermarket Online. A copy of the decision will be made available shortly. Afro-IP went orange reporting the difficulties faced by brand owners trying to protect single colours before the ASA here.

That's the ASA's position and they are sticking to it! Well, we will see - Afro-IP understands that the Pritt decision is on appeal.

Meanwhile some depressing news is that head of CIPRO (Keith Sendwe) is apparently off sick and "very ill". Afro-IP wishes him a speedy recovery. Business Report though is less sympathetic.

Mark Schweizer of IPKAT writing for the excellent Class 46 Marques blog brings us an example of brand tarnishment and shows sensitivity to his American audience here. Afro Leo would like to think his post was inspired by all the pomp and ceremony last Friday on Afro-IP.

Please keep an eye out for commentry on the Oilwell decision, coming soon.
Read More

Thursday, 26 November 2009

Darren Olivier

Registries in the news..again

South Africa - The Department of Trade and Industry is proceeding with plans to convert the Companies and Intellectual Property Registration Office (Cipro) into a self- standing commission. The department hopes the creation of a new structure will give added momentum to attempts to improve the functioning of Cipro and ensure that it fulfils the mandate of the new Companies Act, which will assign new educational, research and enforcement powers to the commission. Cipro’s strategic plan for the next few years — also tabled in Parliament last week — noted that one of the organisation’s key objectives was to ensure “quick, responsive and easy access” to services online as well as a possible reduction in fees for company registrations for small businesses. (Business Day).

Botswana - Intellectual property is key to economic development and other spheres of wealth creation. As such it remains crucial to the commercialisation of technology, development of science and trade in goods and services, said Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Trade and Industry, Ms Banny Molosiwa. She was speaking at the official opening of the 33rd session of the Administration Council of the African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO) in Gaborone two days ago. BOPA

Afro Leo says that it is great to hear positive news about Cipro and would welcome further news about the Aripo conference in Gabarone.
Read More

Tuesday, 24 November 2009

Darren Olivier

Registries in the news..for different reasons

WIPO has launched an enhanced online patent information service that will improve public access to information on patents filed and granted around the world. WIPO’s PATENTSCOPE®, which currently hosts data on more than 1.6 million international patent applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), has been extended to include several collections of national and regional patent information. In this first phase, WIPO’s PATENTSCOPE® includes the patent data collections of eight patent offices: African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO), Cuba, Israel, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Singapore, South Africa and Vietnam.



Closer to home...more problems. The Risk Manager at Cipro has reportedly been suspended on a charge of "breach of confidentiality" after he supplied information to the Police involving tender rigging charges made against Cipro's Chief Information Officer. The Democratic Alliance asks: "If informants are not protected, then what is the prospect of fighting corruption in government?" Cipro's CEO lambasts the remarks as "highly unproductive and futile for a member of parliament to continue with these allegations whereby CIPRO as an organisation is being undermined and its credibility being attacked." (Politicsweb)


This unfortunate news comes just as CIPRO had managed to regain a small measure on its credibility rating with news of arrests following the Ciprogate fraud scandal reported by Afro-IP here. It will not help that respected Leadership magazine has picked up the story with this scathing comment about CIPRO when reporting over steps taken by President Zuma to deal with the corruption problem across RSA, generally:


"CIPRO has long been a den of corruption, incompetence and chaos with many cases of fraud committed at CIPRO having recently come to light. Many professionals such as lawyers who deal with it on a daily basis consider it to be something of a joke while it [CIPRO] should be above reproach as a fundamental service of vital importance to business and the protection of intellectual property rights."

On a more positive note, Afro Leo recently met with four officials in the company and close corporation name objection department for an hour to discuss the workings of the office and how it is dealing with cases of fraud. He is pleased to say that in obvious cases of fraud the expense of a formal objection under the company and close corporation names legislation is not necessary, and Cipro has undertaken to deal with these cases on an expeditious basis on being alerted to the problem. That said clients may still need to file an objection to meet deadlines in case the registration is not found to be fraudulent.
Read More

Wednesday, 28 October 2009

Darren Olivier

Some progress in CIPRO fraud pandemic

Two recent reports reveal that "investigators are trying to link three men arrested for stealing more than R80 million (+-$10.4 million) to the fraud pandemic at CIPRO". According to yesterday's The Star the three men "were arrested on the weekend". There is a also a report that the suspected "kingpin" was arrested in June, denied bail in August and is due back in Court in December. Thanks to Maria Mcgibbon (Bowman Gilfillan) for The Star report.

The significance of "Ciprogate" is such that new finance minister Pravin Gordin was tested by Marius Swart of the Democratic Alliance who asked in a written parliamentary question what amount of money Sars (revenue service) lost in cases where employees of Cipro duplicated companies on the database in the 2008/09 financial year. "These cases reveal that Sars has lost a total of R50 949 743.80 in income tax refund fraud as a result of duplicate companies registered at Cipro," he said. The companies were SBC International Management Services (R31 600 946.89 lost) and Sun Microsystems (R19 348 796.91 lost)." IOL News


Despite the progress in catching the perpetrators (for which Cipro and the authorities should be congratulated), Afro Leo received a report from an attorney who, for the past three weeks, has been trying (without success) to set up a meeting with Registrar of Companies and Close Corporations to try to agree a way in which orders for changes to obvious company and close corporation name duplications can be made without trade mark owners having to incur the cost of filing formal objections. The attorney's explanation to the unfortunate client (now faced with incurring three objection costs) is as follows:


"We called the Cipro general number and made a report on the Cipro fraud report line (which promises a response within 48 hours). We received no response from the fraud report line. The operator on the general number referred us to the Cipro legal department. We called the legal department and left messages, to no avail. We finally made contact but the person who answered the call referred us to someone else and we emailed him. No Joy. We have also written to various other people at CIPRO and have had no joy. These efforts have taken place since our call with you [the client] on 7 October."

Are trade mark owners expected to incur the cost of formal objections (which may be to the High Court) where fraud has occurred? This blog has encouraged trade mark owners to assist Cipro by setting up watches to check the registers against their trade marks. Trade mark owners are responding - some guidance from Cipro would be appreciated.

  • For previous reports on Ciprogate click here.
  • On how to escape handcuffs click here and an early attempt to improve handcuffs.
Read More

Wednesday, 7 October 2009

Darren Olivier

Tuesday's ticklers: EAC, CIPRO, Adwords

Adam Smith (World Trade Mark Review) has published a news article based on a full interview he had with Omari Issa, the CEO of Investment Climate Facility for Africa, with whom he was talking about the counterfeiting problem in east Africa. The new article is here: Brand owners urged to sponsor enforcement coordination. This is the latest in WTMR's coverage of the EAC study into harmonizing IP enforcement in the region. Previous article here: Fresh move to harmonize anti-counterfeiting law in east Africa, with further reports and background reading from Afro-IP here. Afro-IP will report WTMR's update article when it is published. Thank you Adam.

Minister of Trade & Industry's (Rob Davies) replies to parliamentary questions on Ciprogate. Meanwhile, Natacha Rey (LLM IP student at UCT) has alerted Afro Leo this news article about the transformation of CIPRO to a commission following amendments to Companies legislation, commenting that "a commission is the opportunity SA IP needs...." If the success of the Competition Commission is anything to go by Ms Rey may well be correct.

Jeremy Speres (UCT LLM Student) sent in a short piece he wrote for a class, comparing the recent ECJ Advocate General's opinion on the AdWords matter with the decision of the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Rescuecom v Google, also concerning AdWords. Thank you Jeremy - we wait with bated breath for the ECJ decision. Afro-IP reported on the ECJ advocate general opinion recently: ECJ closer to Adwords decision.


Elizabeth Bourne (librarian, Bowman Gilfillan) has sourced the elusive and unreported Lollipop decision - the first reasoned decision of its kind regarding ambush marketing in RSA and S15(A) of the Merchandise Marks Act. Metcash were founding wanting after having been sued by Fifa for ambush marketing the 2010 World Cup Event by promoting their lollipops as "2010 Pops" with the national flag and footballs. Afro Leo wants to know Roshana's view (and any of yours) on this decision published shortly here and summarised by Fifa's counsel Kelly Thompson (Adams and Adams) here. He also wants to know why the decision is not reported.

Finally, Afro-IP notes that its email subscriber list has now passed 300, its LinkedIN subscription is at 60 and its two feeds reach over 100. The blog wishes to thank its followers but also invite them to contribute through the comment section on the blog, by sending upcoming events or offering guest posts. The several voices on the contributor list are not enough to cover the entire Africa nor are they sufficient to get the full and depth range of commentary on IP in Africa. The community is growing. Be part of it.
Read More

Friday, 28 August 2009

Darren Olivier

CIPRO CEO interview

Moneyweb has published a interview conducted with Ferdi Myburg (who is credited for breaking the story) and Keith Sendwe, the CEO of CIPRO. You can listen and read it all through the link below, but here is a snippet:

KEITH SENDWE: Well, currently with the help of Mr Myburgh alerting the public to the fact that there is this - and we are very glad he did - we started a process a few months back trying to alert the public of fraud. And I think he's brought it to the fore. Now we really need to get on to this. We have instituted a task team that is looking at this whole process of looking at all the duplicate names or associate names that we have on our system. Let me take an example. During the process that we were running we discovered 2 800 duplicate names. Now, without going through a process of investigating, it was easy to say they are fraudulent. But if you look at it, it was simply CCs that converted to companies. So we have to go and look at each and every instance of this. Any company can go on our system and do a search to discover if there is anything wrong there.

KEITH SENDWE: Firstly, we've done the investigation. We've also, over the last couple of months, spoken to our staff. We've gone through a process of alerting them to the fact that we will take stringent and very tough action against them. But I think it is more important to realise that this sort of thing is not confined to South Africa....

KEITH SENDWE: I think as management, Alec, we would do everything in our power. You must remember, we are in a highly unionised environment. We have to follow due process. But the message is certainly out there and when I spoke to the DG last year, in fact in December, and I said to him look, this is the extent of the problem, he said we've got to go the whole way and just clean up. And one of the reasons I was brought in two-and-a-half years ago is to do this transformation and cleanup.

ALEC HOGG: You did make a statement today that a number of companies have incurred a considerable financial loss as a result of this fraud. What is the situation with those companies? Are they suing Cipro? 

KEITH SENDWE: Well, no company has come to us, and certainly from our side we'll engage with them in any discussion. But we don't think we are liable in any way in terms of the Companies Act.

ALEC HOGG: You don't think you are liable?

KEITH SENDWE: No.

ALEC HOGG: So who's liable?

KEITH SENDWE: Well, we are all into this together. It is a process. Cipro does its part, the banks do their part, everyone does their part. Certainly from our side we've done everything on our side that we should have done to ensure that nothing has gone wrong.

Click here for the entire interview. 

It is quite incredible how blame is apportioned and nobody takes ultimate responsibility. It is true that these sorts of things happen in other countries (eg the ID scandal in the UK not long ago) but this is normally followed by a national outcry. Whilst Mr Sendwe should be commended for taking this head on in an interview he (and his bosses) have a very long way to go before credibility can be re-established at the national office, and that is a major problem for everyone interested in RSA's ability to attract investment. 


Read More

Thursday, 27 August 2009

Darren Olivier

Alleged CIPRO corruption update

Afro Leo received a call last evening from a reliable Afro-IP subscriber, who preferred not to be identified, that CIPRO was taking significant steps to flush out the alleged perpetrators of the corruption. According to the source over 150 people may have been implicated. CIPRO apparently know who these people are but are conscious that immediate suspension could cripple the workings of the Office and so steps are being taken to address the situation in a more pragmatic way. In the meantime employees are apparently under close supervision.
Read More

Tuesday, 25 August 2009

Darren Olivier

More CIPRO woes

Afro-IP has been informed by several sources (including Adv Paola Cirone) about a devastating article penned by Mr James Myburg entitled CIPRO at epicentre of SA's fraud pandemic on Politicsweb. Afro Leo says that brand owners need to step up their efforts too.

"Over the past two years corrupt officials at CIPRO (the Company and Intellectual Property Registration Office), acting with seeming impunity, have facilitated hundreds if not thousands of scams which have hit the South African Revenue Service, a number of prominent companies, and hundreds of smaller private businesses."

There are apparently two forms of the fraud - so called counterfeit companies and hijacked companies:

Counterfeit companies

"One of the most prevalent scams involves the registration of duplicate or counterfeit companies. These are companies which almost the same name as the real company.... Once the company has been registered the fraudsters - who operate using stolen identities - then attempt to establish bank accounts in the name of the counterfeit company. ... This is then used to facilitate fraud against the legitimate company, its clients and suppliers, and innocent third parties....Clients are sometimes contacted and informed that the banking details of the real company have been changed (to that of the counterfeit.) ‘Overpayments' may be made using the counterfeit company's cheques to the legitimate company's suppliers and the fraudsters will ask for a refund.....In many cases cheques are intercepted at the South African Post Office. Companies with similar names to the recipients of the cheque are then fraudulently registered through CIPRO. Bank accounts are established in that company's name, the cheques are cashed, and the money removed. Usually, the counterfeit company uses the same name with a word (such as Gauteng) or a number (usually 01) added to the end. If need be, the fraudster can simply add the "01" to the named beneficiary on the stolen cheque, and it can then be deposited into their account."

"The following [companies] confirmed they had been targeted: Schindler's Lifts, SA Guide Dogs Association, Giants Canning, Trident Steel, Johannesburg Tractor Spares, G and L Agencies, Marlboro Crane Hire, Hypersave Supermarket, Space Television, Colletts Pharmacy, The Media Shop, and AfriSave Cash and Carry."

Hijacked companies:

Between 2007 and 2009 a series of well known South African companies have had their legitimate directors deregistered on the CIPRO system. New directors were inserted, probably using stolen identities. ..."companies affected by this type of fraud include Cashbuild (South Africa), The Lion Match Company, Trident Steel, Fleet Street Publications, Tedelex and Gardena (SA)...Most of these frauds were carried out using the electronic lodgement of the C29m (details of directors) form. Due to weaknesses in the system agents accessing the CIPRO database could change the names of directors of any company at will. This was done from ‘outside' but it did require insider knowledge. Despite being notified of the problem as early as October 2007 CIPRO only acted in February this year. E-lodgements of the CM29 form were temporarily suspended on February 25 2009 by then acting CEO Renier du Toit. However, this did not stop the problem completely. On April 8 2009 someone inside CIPRO deregistered the two legitimate directors of BLSA industries (the company which manufactures PoolBrite). One ‘Ndumiso Terran[ce] Mzazi' was inserted as the sole director instead."
Politicsweb Comment:

"Once the counterfeited (or hijacked) company has been registered and a bank account opened it becomes very difficult for the police to solve subsequent frauds. The new directors usually use forged or stolen identities. A common practice is for the fraudsters to use stolen identity documents and scan and electronically alter proof of residence documents in order to meet FICA requirements. Unless the fraudsters are caught in the act, or with the false IDs in their possession, it is almost impossible to successfully nail them. .. In a written response to a query from Politicsweb CIPRO CEO Keith Sendwe said he was aware of the basic points we raised. The organisation, he said, was "pulling out all stops to prevent fraudulent activities taking place." His full reply to our questions can be found here. "

Afro Leo's Comment:

This is a truly depressing article and the allegations against CIPRO, if correct, are very worrying. Corruption is inexcusable. However, it is important to note that by law CIPRO takes a limited role as public protector of the names of companies (justifiably so) and it is really up to the brand owners to police the register of company and cc names regularly to ensure that no confusingly similar names exist. CIPRO (like a number of other registries around the world) do not, for example, cross check the trade mark and company name databases when registering new names. Neither do a number of domain name registries which are often also quite prepared to register small changes to domain names and register them in the names of different applicants. Of course CIPRO needs to ensure that its staff are adequately trained and, above all, are not corrupt but beyond that it is up to the brand owner to employ a proper watching service and police trade marks and company names effectively. The recently reported Alliance case (see here) shows just how apathetic brand holders can be in RSA when it comes to looking after their IP. The alleged state of affairs at CIPRO is worrying and corruption needs to stop. However, brand owners also need to step up their efforts.
Read More

Tuesday, 14 July 2009

Darren Olivier

CIPRO (trade marks) - what can be done?

A tweet from Birgit Clark alerted Afro Leo to changes by the UK intellectual property office (UK IPO) in October which include an e-filing discount, a new service called "Right Start application", changes to series marks and an increased fee for filing the Form TM9 (application for an extension of time). Afro Leo stands to be corrected but all of these changes appear to be designed to increase the use of the UK IPO by business (especially by SMEs), assist in removing abuse and promote a paperless/more efficient system. The "Right Start application" is particularly innovative. See link here)

Knowing colleagues in the UK, the changes to the UK IPO procedures will not all be hailed as improvements and will attract their fair share of criticism but they (and other changes) are an attempt by the Office to do things differently, more efficiently and perhaps even help the UK IPO stay in business. For a moment Afro Leo contemplates the trade mark registry in RSA (CIPRO) which is beset by delays, charges for online searches, still uses the antiquated single class filing system (not entirely their fault) and is apparently contemplating increased fees because national filings have fallen - quite the opposite to the incentives the UK IPO is offering to increase filings.

Both Registries are under pressure. In the UK, there is strong competition from the Community Trade Marks Office which has just dropped its fees and the UK IPO sits in Newport which is likely to make recruiting more difficult compared to when it was based in London, simply on the size of the catchment area. The dire state of the UK economy will also play a significant role. In RSA, it does not appear that CIPRO gets the ministerial attention/profile that it deserves or requires in order to fund the training to enable it to become truly world class and help them recruit. Take for example, a story which reached Afro Leo's ears recently that trade mark examiners attended classes for the SAIIPL Trade Mark Practitioner exams but did not sit the exams because CIPRO could not or would not pay for it (again he stands to be corrected).

It was not long ago that the UK IPO took a considerable time period to register a trade mark and yet today it is one of the most advanced registries in the world in terms of its performance. Both the UK IPO and CIPRO deal with around 30000 trade mark applications per year so the comparison is not completely irrational. CIPRO's intentions are good and some of their challenges quite unique. What can be done to assist them improve?
Read More

Monday, 8 September 2008

Darren Olivier

RSA: CIPRO trade mark update & SAIIPL AGM

According to feedback from the CIPRO trade mark liason meeting held on 3 September involving CIPRO and representatives of the major IP firms:

1. CIPRO is testing a declining balance system for searches with a view to formally implementing it.

2. Requests for expediting the issuing of certificates will only be entertained in two circumstances, namely if the certificate is specifically required for litigation proceedings or if the certificate is required to obtain a foreign application in the US, for example. In both instances the request has to be sent with a motivation and supporting documents.

3. The major firms are still busy with a project to clear the backlog of outstanding official actions, outstanding notices of acceptance and outstanding certificates.

This form of assistance (esp 3. above) between major firms (at their own expense) and CIPRO has been going on for many years with a view to improving the effectiveness of the National Office. However, despite the assistance, CIPRO still struggles with backlogs, ineffeciencies and staffing problems.

Meantime, SAIIPL has issued a formal notice of the 2008 Annual General Meeting of the Institute to be held at the Misty Hills Country Estate, Muldersdrift on Saturday, 8 November 2008 at 10:00.
Read More