Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Europe. Show all posts
Tuesday, 18 August 2015
Monday, 22 July 2013
Efficiency, Imported From Europe
Yet vehicles that were once the antithesis of eco-friendly are making far deeper
inroads with mainstream consumers: fuel-sipping, ultralong-range diesel cars.
Attracted by newly quiet and clean-running engines that deliver some 15 to 30 percent better mileage than their gasoline counterparts, Americans flocked to diesels in 2012. Sales of diesel passenger cars and S.U.V.’s jumped by nearly 26 percent from 2011. That’s despite the stubbornly high price of diesel fuel that, at $3.87 a gallon on average, is 23 cents more than regular gas (but a penny less than premium grade).
Given that reality, some automakers are wondering out loud why new-school diesel cars — which in some cases burn even less fuel and produce lower levels of global-warming gases than hybrids — are getting no love or largess from Washington.
“This planet will not be rescued by superexpensive technology for the few, but when the majority of mobility is clean,” said Rainer Michel, vice president for product planning at Volkswagen of America. “Diesel is far less expensive than plug-ins and E.V.’s, with better range and performance. This technology is available today.”
That assessment might be expected from VW or another automaker based in Europe, where roughly half of all new cars are frugal diesels. One in five new VWs sold in the United States today is diesel-powered, making the company by far the nation’s leader.
But with automakers on a steep climb to the federal fuel economy target of 54.5 m.p.g. for 2025, even domestic automakers can no longer afford to ignore a technology with so much potential.
For instance, the new Chevrolet Cruze Diesel, carrying a 46-m.p.g. federal highway rating, is officially the highest-mileage nonhybrid sold in America. The Mazda 6 Skyactiv-D sedan goes on sale this year. A Cadillac ATS diesel is in the works.
The Jeep Grand Cherokee EcoDiesel, powered by a turbo V-6 with Fiat connections, is arriving in dealers. Jeep executives may expand that engine’s availability, perhaps to the all-new 2014 Cherokee or a 2015 Wrangler. Ford’s Transit commercial van will also get diesel power.
Despite remarkable advances in mainstream gasoline engines, the combustion cycle developed by Rudolf Diesel at the end of the 19th century continues to be more fuel-efficient. For one, diesel engines squeeze the air in their cylinders to such pressures that the injected fuel ignites with no need for an electric spark. And gallon-for-gallon, diesel fuel contains some 12 percent more energy than gasoline. The upshot: diesels consume about 15 to 30 percent less fuel over all.
Owners of heavy-duty pickups have long relied on these durable, hard-working engines, which have the reputation for running 300,000 miles and more. This fall, the 2014 Ram — among the mileage leaders on the gasoline side — will become the only light-duty pickup to offer a diesel, a 3-liter V-6 shared with Jeep. That innovation, in a pickup class that accounts for more than a million sales each year, is sure to be closely watched by Ford and Chevy.
About 6.7 million diesel vehicles were on American roads in 2012, according to R. L. Polk registration data, but barely 800,000 of those were passenger cars and S.U.V.’s; heavy-duty pickups and vans account for most of the remainder. That compares with 2.3 million registered hybrid models.
The number of available diesel car and S.U.V. models is expected to double by the end of 2014, to 34 from 17, according to the Diesel Technology Forum.
An industry analysis firm, LMC Automotive, projects that diesel market share will double by 2018, from 3.7 percent to 7.5 percent. That would rival the 8.7 percent for all hybrids and plug-ins combined. And battery-only E.V.’s? They’re expected to capture just 0.6 percent of sales.
Attracted by newly quiet and clean-running engines that deliver some 15 to 30 percent better mileage than their gasoline counterparts, Americans flocked to diesels in 2012. Sales of diesel passenger cars and S.U.V.’s jumped by nearly 26 percent from 2011. That’s despite the stubbornly high price of diesel fuel that, at $3.87 a gallon on average, is 23 cents more than regular gas (but a penny less than premium grade).
Given that reality, some automakers are wondering out loud why new-school diesel cars — which in some cases burn even less fuel and produce lower levels of global-warming gases than hybrids — are getting no love or largess from Washington.
“This planet will not be rescued by superexpensive technology for the few, but when the majority of mobility is clean,” said Rainer Michel, vice president for product planning at Volkswagen of America. “Diesel is far less expensive than plug-ins and E.V.’s, with better range and performance. This technology is available today.”
That assessment might be expected from VW or another automaker based in Europe, where roughly half of all new cars are frugal diesels. One in five new VWs sold in the United States today is diesel-powered, making the company by far the nation’s leader.
But with automakers on a steep climb to the federal fuel economy target of 54.5 m.p.g. for 2025, even domestic automakers can no longer afford to ignore a technology with so much potential.
For instance, the new Chevrolet Cruze Diesel, carrying a 46-m.p.g. federal highway rating, is officially the highest-mileage nonhybrid sold in America. The Mazda 6 Skyactiv-D sedan goes on sale this year. A Cadillac ATS diesel is in the works.
The Jeep Grand Cherokee EcoDiesel, powered by a turbo V-6 with Fiat connections, is arriving in dealers. Jeep executives may expand that engine’s availability, perhaps to the all-new 2014 Cherokee or a 2015 Wrangler. Ford’s Transit commercial van will also get diesel power.
Despite remarkable advances in mainstream gasoline engines, the combustion cycle developed by Rudolf Diesel at the end of the 19th century continues to be more fuel-efficient. For one, diesel engines squeeze the air in their cylinders to such pressures that the injected fuel ignites with no need for an electric spark. And gallon-for-gallon, diesel fuel contains some 12 percent more energy than gasoline. The upshot: diesels consume about 15 to 30 percent less fuel over all.
Owners of heavy-duty pickups have long relied on these durable, hard-working engines, which have the reputation for running 300,000 miles and more. This fall, the 2014 Ram — among the mileage leaders on the gasoline side — will become the only light-duty pickup to offer a diesel, a 3-liter V-6 shared with Jeep. That innovation, in a pickup class that accounts for more than a million sales each year, is sure to be closely watched by Ford and Chevy.
About 6.7 million diesel vehicles were on American roads in 2012, according to R. L. Polk registration data, but barely 800,000 of those were passenger cars and S.U.V.’s; heavy-duty pickups and vans account for most of the remainder. That compares with 2.3 million registered hybrid models.
The number of available diesel car and S.U.V. models is expected to double by the end of 2014, to 34 from 17, according to the Diesel Technology Forum.
An industry analysis firm, LMC Automotive, projects that diesel market share will double by 2018, from 3.7 percent to 7.5 percent. That would rival the 8.7 percent for all hybrids and plug-ins combined. And battery-only E.V.’s? They’re expected to capture just 0.6 percent of sales.
Off the Charts: New-Car Salesmen Are Lonely in Europe
The European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association reported this week that
new-car registrations in the European Union were down 6 percent in June compared
with those in the month a year earlier and were running at their slowest pace
since 1996.
Even in Germany, whose economy has been stronger than those of most of its European brethren, sales were the lowest for any June since the country was unified in 1990.
The lone bright spot was Britain, where June sales were up 13 percent from a year earlier. Retail sales in general have been surprisingly strong in Britain in recent months, and, as can be seen from the accompanying charts, in the last 12 months its new-car registrations were 9 percent higher than in the previous 12 months, making it one of only three European countries shown to have posted an increase.
At the same time, auto sales have been on the rise in the United States and were higher in the last 12 months than at any time since 2008.
New-car sales have long been a reliable economic indicator, one that falls sharply when recessions start and then rises rapidly when economies recover. That is largely because car purchases can often be postponed if buyers are worried, creating pent-up demand when recessions end.
In some of the European countries struggling the most, where an end to the recession appears to be far-off, new-car sales have been falling steadily for years as those who absolutely must buy a car choose a used one instead. In some countries, there is an active business importing used cars from more prosperous nations.
The charts show the level of sales in the last 12 months compared with those for the calendar year 2006, before the credit crisis led to the Great Recession. In a handful of countries, sales are higher now, and in the United States the decline is only 5 percent.
But in the euro zone as a whole, sales are 28 percent below the 2006 level. In Spain, Greece, Portugal and Ireland, sales are down by at least 50 percent, and in most of those countries there is no sign of recovery. Outside the euro zone, sales in Romania and Hungary are also far below the 2006 level.
In the early days of the credit crisis, new-car sales held up better in Europe than in the United States, and more generous “cash for clunkers” incentives ignited a rebound in 2010. But since then, weakening European economies have led to new declines that show no sign of ending.
One of the sharpest declines is in the Netherlands, which has fallen into a new recession amid rising unemployment and falling consumer confidence. June new-car registrations were less than half the level of the previous June, and sales in the last 12 months are down nearly a third compared with those in the period a year earlier.
The charts reflect sales of passenger cars only, excluding sales of light trucks, a category that includes sport utility vehicles and minivans, vehicles that are less likely to be used for business in the United States than in Europe. If those vehicles were included, the performance of both the European and American markets would appear to be a little worse, but the trends would be similar.
Even in Germany, whose economy has been stronger than those of most of its European brethren, sales were the lowest for any June since the country was unified in 1990.
The lone bright spot was Britain, where June sales were up 13 percent from a year earlier. Retail sales in general have been surprisingly strong in Britain in recent months, and, as can be seen from the accompanying charts, in the last 12 months its new-car registrations were 9 percent higher than in the previous 12 months, making it one of only three European countries shown to have posted an increase.
At the same time, auto sales have been on the rise in the United States and were higher in the last 12 months than at any time since 2008.
New-car sales have long been a reliable economic indicator, one that falls sharply when recessions start and then rises rapidly when economies recover. That is largely because car purchases can often be postponed if buyers are worried, creating pent-up demand when recessions end.
In some of the European countries struggling the most, where an end to the recession appears to be far-off, new-car sales have been falling steadily for years as those who absolutely must buy a car choose a used one instead. In some countries, there is an active business importing used cars from more prosperous nations.
The charts show the level of sales in the last 12 months compared with those for the calendar year 2006, before the credit crisis led to the Great Recession. In a handful of countries, sales are higher now, and in the United States the decline is only 5 percent.
But in the euro zone as a whole, sales are 28 percent below the 2006 level. In Spain, Greece, Portugal and Ireland, sales are down by at least 50 percent, and in most of those countries there is no sign of recovery. Outside the euro zone, sales in Romania and Hungary are also far below the 2006 level.
In the early days of the credit crisis, new-car sales held up better in Europe than in the United States, and more generous “cash for clunkers” incentives ignited a rebound in 2010. But since then, weakening European economies have led to new declines that show no sign of ending.
One of the sharpest declines is in the Netherlands, which has fallen into a new recession amid rising unemployment and falling consumer confidence. June new-car registrations were less than half the level of the previous June, and sales in the last 12 months are down nearly a third compared with those in the period a year earlier.
The charts reflect sales of passenger cars only, excluding sales of light trucks, a category that includes sport utility vehicles and minivans, vehicles that are less likely to be used for business in the United States than in Europe. If those vehicles were included, the performance of both the European and American markets would appear to be a little worse, but the trends would be similar.
Monday, 15 July 2013
Head of Google China leaves post, to be replaced by executive from Europe
Google’s leader for its China operations, John Liu, is leaving his position
as the company continues to maintain a low-key presence in the nation following
heated disputes over online censorship.
Liu has “decided to pursue other opportunities,” Google said in an email on Monday. Liu had been at Google for nearly six years, and originally was head of sales for the company’s Greater China operations. In 2009, he was elevated to head of Google’s Greater China business after the departure of his predecessor, Kai-Fu Lee, a tech entrepreneur well-known in the country.
Liu worked at Google as its search business in China slowly grew to compete with the country’s largest search engine Baidu. But in 2010, Google decided it would no longer agree to China’s demands for online censorship, and initiated a partial retreat from the Chinese market.
Since then, Google’s presence in China has diminished. The company’s market share for search is at 3 percent, according to Chinese analytics site CNZZ.com. In addition, many Google services, such as Google Play, YouTube or Google Plus are either blocked or not offered in the country.
The company, however, sees a major opportunity in helping Chinese companies advertise outside the country through its online services. At the same time, Google’s Android OS dominates the nation’s handset market, and has close to a 90 percent market share.
Scott Beaumont, who leads Google’s partnerships business in Europe will take over from Liu starting in mid-August. “He’ll continue our focus on helping Chinese businesses of all sizes grow locally and globally,” Google said.
Liu has “decided to pursue other opportunities,” Google said in an email on Monday. Liu had been at Google for nearly six years, and originally was head of sales for the company’s Greater China operations. In 2009, he was elevated to head of Google’s Greater China business after the departure of his predecessor, Kai-Fu Lee, a tech entrepreneur well-known in the country.
Liu worked at Google as its search business in China slowly grew to compete with the country’s largest search engine Baidu. But in 2010, Google decided it would no longer agree to China’s demands for online censorship, and initiated a partial retreat from the Chinese market.
Since then, Google’s presence in China has diminished. The company’s market share for search is at 3 percent, according to Chinese analytics site CNZZ.com. In addition, many Google services, such as Google Play, YouTube or Google Plus are either blocked or not offered in the country.
The company, however, sees a major opportunity in helping Chinese companies advertise outside the country through its online services. At the same time, Google’s Android OS dominates the nation’s handset market, and has close to a 90 percent market share.
Scott Beaumont, who leads Google’s partnerships business in Europe will take over from Liu starting in mid-August. “He’ll continue our focus on helping Chinese businesses of all sizes grow locally and globally,” Google said.
Saturday, 13 July 2013
Japan's Rakuten to Take on Netflix, Amazon's LoveFilm in Europe
COLOGNE, Germany – Japanese e-commerce group Rakuten is going head-to-head with VOD giants Netflix and Amazon's LoveFilm in Europe, announcing plans to roll out its video streaming service Wuaki.tv across the continent during the next two years.
Wuaki, the Spanish VOD platform that Rakuten acquired last year, plans to make the U.K. its first new European territory, with more to follow.
On its English-language Facebook page, Wuaki was offering early-bird U.K. subscribers its film and series streaming service for $4.50 (?2.99) a month. That compares to about $9 (?5.99) per month and $7.50 (?4.99) per month for Netflix and LoveFilm, respectively, in Britain.
STORY: Netflix to Launch in Netherlands Later This Year
Wuaki said it will provide U.K. customers with thousands of hours of content, including titles from Disney, Sony Pictures Entertainment, 20th Century Fox and Warner Bros. as well as local providers including the BBC. Highlights including Disney's Oz the Great and Powerful and cult BBC sci-fi series Doctor Who.
The U.K. market is one of the most attractive -- and crowded -- in Europe for VOD. In addition to Netflix and LoveFilm, British rivals such as pay-TV giant BSkyB and online catch-up offerings including the BBC's popular iPlayer service compete for user eyeballs. Technologically, Wuaki will start behind Netflix and LoveFilm as its beta service in Britain initially won't support mobile tablets or smart TVs.
It will be interesting to see where Wuaki goes after Britain. Scandinavia, with its rich, well-connected population, would be an obvious choice, but both Netflix and LoveFilm are already there, too. It's a similar story in the Netherlands, the next European territory on Netflix's hit list. In Germany, a potentially huge market, there is only LoveFilm and local competitors, including Maxdome, a VOD service run by German commercial TV giant ProSiebenSat.1.
France also is an option, but regulatory issues there, which require VOD services to hold back films a full two years after their theatrical release, have kept international players from plunging into that market.
Friday, 12 July 2013
Antitrust Scrutiny of Telecoms in Europe
BRUSSELS — European Union antitrust authorities said on Thursday that they had
investigated major telecommunications companies, including Deutsche Telekom of
Germany, on suspicion that the companies were using their dominant market
positions to limit Internet providers’ access to their networks.
The European Commission, the executive arm that oversees antitrust policy across the 28-member bloc, did not identify the companies or say how many had been inspected in the operation, which took place Wednesday.
But Deutsche Telekom confirmed on its Web site that a raid had occurred, adding that e-mails and other data had been seized. Reuters reported that the authorities had also raided the offices of Orange of France and Telefónica of Spain.
Big telecommunications companies provide the networks that link smaller sites, like movie-streaming services, to the Web, effectively acting as a gateway. In a statement, the commission said it was concerned that the companies may have violated antitrust rules “that prohibit the abuse of a dominant market position.” Those companies provide services “crucial for the functioning of the Internet” so consumers can gain access to “Internet content with the necessary quality,” it said.
Inspections are a preliminary step in an antitrust investigation. Companies found to have broken European Union competition laws can be fined as much as 10 percent of their annual global sales.
Cogent Communications, a company based in Washington that sells Internet access to third parties, said the inspections were probably linked to complaints it had filed in Germany against Deutsche Telekom and in France against Orange, previously known as France Télécom.
Dave Schaeffer, the chief executive of Cogent, said by telephone that the major telecommunications companies in France, Germany and Spain were impeding his business by refusing to upgrade congested networks. The result, he said, was that services for Cogent clients like Netflix, the film-streaming service, or YouTube, the online video-sharing site, would be slowed or difficult to access.
He cited Dailymotion, the French video-sharing site that is owned by Orange. “For example, Orange owns the direct competitor to YouTube,” Mr. Schaeffer said. Orange “wants French consumers to use Dailymotion instead of YouTube.”
The French state holds a stake of about 27 percent in Orange. This year, the government of President François Hollande expressed its objections to plans by Yahoo to buy a controlling stake in Dailymotion.
Mr. Schaeffer said his company had discussed the matter with the commission but that Cogent had not submitted a formal complaint. He said national authorities in France and Germany had rejected his company’s complaints against Orange and Deutsche Telekom but that Cogent was appealing the French decision. Cogent has also had difficulties in Spain but has not filed a complaint there, he said.
Deutsche Telekom said on its Web site that it was “surprised by the initiation of further investigations by the commission into the global market for Internet traffic, since previous allegations have all turned out to be unfounded.”
“Similar investigations carried out by national regulatory bodies, who have also dealt with the issue in great detail, have also been abandoned,” it said. “This market is dominated by major providers based in the United States, which means we are not the right target for these investigations.”
The European Commission, the executive arm that oversees antitrust policy across the 28-member bloc, did not identify the companies or say how many had been inspected in the operation, which took place Wednesday.
But Deutsche Telekom confirmed on its Web site that a raid had occurred, adding that e-mails and other data had been seized. Reuters reported that the authorities had also raided the offices of Orange of France and Telefónica of Spain.
Big telecommunications companies provide the networks that link smaller sites, like movie-streaming services, to the Web, effectively acting as a gateway. In a statement, the commission said it was concerned that the companies may have violated antitrust rules “that prohibit the abuse of a dominant market position.” Those companies provide services “crucial for the functioning of the Internet” so consumers can gain access to “Internet content with the necessary quality,” it said.
Inspections are a preliminary step in an antitrust investigation. Companies found to have broken European Union competition laws can be fined as much as 10 percent of their annual global sales.
Cogent Communications, a company based in Washington that sells Internet access to third parties, said the inspections were probably linked to complaints it had filed in Germany against Deutsche Telekom and in France against Orange, previously known as France Télécom.
Dave Schaeffer, the chief executive of Cogent, said by telephone that the major telecommunications companies in France, Germany and Spain were impeding his business by refusing to upgrade congested networks. The result, he said, was that services for Cogent clients like Netflix, the film-streaming service, or YouTube, the online video-sharing site, would be slowed or difficult to access.
He cited Dailymotion, the French video-sharing site that is owned by Orange. “For example, Orange owns the direct competitor to YouTube,” Mr. Schaeffer said. Orange “wants French consumers to use Dailymotion instead of YouTube.”
The French state holds a stake of about 27 percent in Orange. This year, the government of President François Hollande expressed its objections to plans by Yahoo to buy a controlling stake in Dailymotion.
Mr. Schaeffer said his company had discussed the matter with the commission but that Cogent had not submitted a formal complaint. He said national authorities in France and Germany had rejected his company’s complaints against Orange and Deutsche Telekom but that Cogent was appealing the French decision. Cogent has also had difficulties in Spain but has not filed a complaint there, he said.
Deutsche Telekom said on its Web site that it was “surprised by the initiation of further investigations by the commission into the global market for Internet traffic, since previous allegations have all turned out to be unfounded.”
“Similar investigations carried out by national regulatory bodies, who have also dealt with the issue in great detail, have also been abandoned,” it said. “This market is dominated by major providers based in the United States, which means we are not the right target for these investigations.”
Monday, 8 July 2013
Apple faces competition for iWatch trademark in Europe
Apple will face competition in Europe for the "iWatch" trademark it has
already filed for in Japan, Taiwan and Mexico, because other companies have
already registered the name in relevant trademark categories.
Among them is Probendi, an Italian company that is also incorporated in the U.S. In February 2009, Probendi registered the European trademark for iWatch with OHIM, the European Union agency responsible for registering trade marks and designs that are valid in all 28 countries of the E.U.
OHIM
Probendi owns the word mark for "iWatch" and uses it for a mobile phone application that sends real-time audio, video, and location data to an online emergency and security support system that can be used by emergency services, according to a brochure about the product. Daniele Di Salvo, Probendi's director, could not immediately comment on Friday on Apple's trademark filings.
That Probendi owns the word mark in the E.U. doesn't mean that Apple cannot apply for a European "iWatch" trademark, said Margarita Garcia of OHIM's information center. "We are an administrative institution, we do not refuse applications," she said. "We cannot be a party in these battles."
According to an online description of OHIM's procedures, it is up to registrants to defend their trademarks, and for new applicants to demonstrate that already-registered trademarks are not being used.
The owner of a trademark has the obligation to ensure it is used and has to check if others in the same market are using the trademark, Garcia said. When an application is filed for the same class of product, OHIM will send a letter to the trademark owner notifying that a similar trademark has been filed, after which the owner can file an opposition which will be reviewed by OHIM, she added.
In Probendi's case, the trademark is in class 9, which covers apparatus, instruments and media for recording, reproducing, carrying, storing, processing, manipulating, transmitting, broadcasting, retrieving and reproducing music, sounds, images, text, signals, software, information, data and code. It also covers software, instruments and apparatus for the location and navigation of vehicles and personnel; computer application software for mobile phones.
Whether an opposition succeeds depends on the arguments filed, Garcia said. "It is never easy, it is never black and white," adding that anyone can oppose a trademark application within three months after it is published.
Probendi is not the only company in Europe staking a claim on the iWatch name, though. AIO Distribution, a company from the U.K., also filed for a European registration of the trademark in Dec. 2012. In this case, AIO tried to register "iwatch", with a lower case w, in class 9 and also class 38, which covers mobile phones and communications by mobile phones.
AIO's trademark claim hasn't been registered yet, and its application was opposed by the Vlaamse Media Maatschappij (Flemish Media Company, VMM), according to OHIM's records.
VMM has an online portal, iwatch.be, where content from the Flemish television channel VTM can be watched for a fee. The company has registered the "iWatch" trademark in Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, according to the records of the Benelux Office for Intellectual Property (BOIP), which covers the three countries.
A VMM spokeswoman reached on Friday declined to comment on Apple's trademark filings in other countries and wouldn't discuss the opposition of AIO's filing at the OHIM. The company doesn't discuss its strategies, she said.
AIO Distribution could not be reached for comment.
There is another iWatch trademark holder on record at the BOIP too. A private person from the Netherlands, Otto F. Weise, registered "iWatch", "iWatch Phone" and "iWatch Connect" in different categories according to BOIP records.
The trademark iWatch is registered in a category covering jewelry while iWatch Phone and iWatch Connect are registered in a category that among others covers cash registers, calculating machines and data processing equipment.
The situation is much the same in the U.K., where Probendi owns the trademark (because it has an E.U. trademark), records at the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) show. In the U.K., an application for "i_watch" from Turkey in the jewelry category is also pending.
In Germany, a visual iwatch trademark is registered by Matrix Security, records of the German Patent and Trademark Office (GPTO) showed. And in June, a Vanessa Hansen, applied for the German word mark "iWatch".
Apple did not respond to a request for comment.
Follow me on Twitter @sajilpl
Among them is Probendi, an Italian company that is also incorporated in the U.S. In February 2009, Probendi registered the European trademark for iWatch with OHIM, the European Union agency responsible for registering trade marks and designs that are valid in all 28 countries of the E.U.
Probendi owns the word mark for "iWatch" and uses it for a mobile phone application that sends real-time audio, video, and location data to an online emergency and security support system that can be used by emergency services, according to a brochure about the product. Daniele Di Salvo, Probendi's director, could not immediately comment on Friday on Apple's trademark filings.
That Probendi owns the word mark in the E.U. doesn't mean that Apple cannot apply for a European "iWatch" trademark, said Margarita Garcia of OHIM's information center. "We are an administrative institution, we do not refuse applications," she said. "We cannot be a party in these battles."
According to an online description of OHIM's procedures, it is up to registrants to defend their trademarks, and for new applicants to demonstrate that already-registered trademarks are not being used.
The owner of a trademark has the obligation to ensure it is used and has to check if others in the same market are using the trademark, Garcia said. When an application is filed for the same class of product, OHIM will send a letter to the trademark owner notifying that a similar trademark has been filed, after which the owner can file an opposition which will be reviewed by OHIM, she added.
In Probendi's case, the trademark is in class 9, which covers apparatus, instruments and media for recording, reproducing, carrying, storing, processing, manipulating, transmitting, broadcasting, retrieving and reproducing music, sounds, images, text, signals, software, information, data and code. It also covers software, instruments and apparatus for the location and navigation of vehicles and personnel; computer application software for mobile phones.
Whether an opposition succeeds depends on the arguments filed, Garcia said. "It is never easy, it is never black and white," adding that anyone can oppose a trademark application within three months after it is published.
Probendi is not the only company in Europe staking a claim on the iWatch name, though. AIO Distribution, a company from the U.K., also filed for a European registration of the trademark in Dec. 2012. In this case, AIO tried to register "iwatch", with a lower case w, in class 9 and also class 38, which covers mobile phones and communications by mobile phones.
AIO's trademark claim hasn't been registered yet, and its application was opposed by the Vlaamse Media Maatschappij (Flemish Media Company, VMM), according to OHIM's records.
VMM has an online portal, iwatch.be, where content from the Flemish television channel VTM can be watched for a fee. The company has registered the "iWatch" trademark in Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, according to the records of the Benelux Office for Intellectual Property (BOIP), which covers the three countries.
A VMM spokeswoman reached on Friday declined to comment on Apple's trademark filings in other countries and wouldn't discuss the opposition of AIO's filing at the OHIM. The company doesn't discuss its strategies, she said.
AIO Distribution could not be reached for comment.
There is another iWatch trademark holder on record at the BOIP too. A private person from the Netherlands, Otto F. Weise, registered "iWatch", "iWatch Phone" and "iWatch Connect" in different categories according to BOIP records.
The trademark iWatch is registered in a category covering jewelry while iWatch Phone and iWatch Connect are registered in a category that among others covers cash registers, calculating machines and data processing equipment.
The situation is much the same in the U.K., where Probendi owns the trademark (because it has an E.U. trademark), records at the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) show. In the U.K., an application for "i_watch" from Turkey in the jewelry category is also pending.
In Germany, a visual iwatch trademark is registered by Matrix Security, records of the German Patent and Trademark Office (GPTO) showed. And in June, a Vanessa Hansen, applied for the German word mark "iWatch".
Apple did not respond to a request for comment.
Follow me on Twitter @sajilpl
Friday, 28 June 2013
Prism implicates Facebook, Yahoo and others in Europe, student group charges
The U.S. government surveillance program known as Prism, which reportedly collects data from major technology companies, has compelled a European student group to file a barrage of complaints against the companies, claiming the data collection runs afoul of European privacy laws.
The complaints were recently filed in Ireland against Facebook and Apple, in Luxembourg against Skype and Microsoft, and in Germany against Yahoo. The complaints are directed at the companies' European subsidiaries.
The Austrian student group Europe-v-Facebook.org said that while the Prism scandal is playing out in the U.S., "most of the involved companies conduct their business through subsidiaries in the EU in order to avoid U.S. taxes." This means that the companies must abide by European privacy laws, the group said.
The basis of the group's complaints concerns how the companies export their user data back to their U.S. counterparts. When a European company sends that data back to its U.S. parent company, that is considered an "export" of the data, the group said, which is only allowed if the subsidiary can ensure an "adequate level or protection" in the foreign country, the group said Wednesday in a statement.
However, "after the recent disclosures on the Prism program, such trust in an 'adequate level of protection' by the involved companies can hardly be upheld," the group said.
In their privacy policies, some of the largest tech companies say that they will share users' personal information to meet applicable laws, regulations, legal processes or enforceable government requests.
Since Prism's revelations have ripped trough the technology industry and the privacy landscape more broadly, companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter and Microsoft have called for greater transparency in disclosure of data on government requests for customer information.
Yahoo, for instance, has since disclosed some of its user data requests, but companies have had a harder time clearing the way to specifically reveal requests made under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which has been at the center of the Prism controversy.
"For European subsidiaries of the involved companies, American 'gag order' does not apply," the student group said Wednesday, adding, "in contrast to that, the companies are even under an obligation to tell the truth under European proceedings."
Germany, Luxembourg and Ireland must now decide whether it is legal for European companies to mass-transfer personal data to a foreign intelligence agency, the group said.
"We want a clear statement by the authorities if a European company may simply give foreign intelligence agencies access to its customer data," it said.
"If this turns out to be legal, then we might have to change the laws," it added.
In recent weeks, Europe's justice commissioner has pledged that Europeans' rights would not be sacrificed for U.S. national security.
The student group also seeks more clarity from the tech companies on how they handle users' personal data under European procedures.
Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Skype and Yahoo could not be immediately reached to comment on the complaints.
In 2006, E.U. data protection authorities already decided in a case involving the payment processor Swift that a mass transfer of data to the U.S. authorities is illegal under EU law, the student group said.
Google and YouTube were not included in the first round of complaints, the group said, because they do not use European intermediaries.
"But since Google has data centers in Ireland, Belgium and Finland, we can take similar actions on a slightly different path," they said.
Follow me on Twitter @sajilpl
The complaints were recently filed in Ireland against Facebook and Apple, in Luxembourg against Skype and Microsoft, and in Germany against Yahoo. The complaints are directed at the companies' European subsidiaries.
The Austrian student group Europe-v-Facebook.org said that while the Prism scandal is playing out in the U.S., "most of the involved companies conduct their business through subsidiaries in the EU in order to avoid U.S. taxes." This means that the companies must abide by European privacy laws, the group said.
The basis of the group's complaints concerns how the companies export their user data back to their U.S. counterparts. When a European company sends that data back to its U.S. parent company, that is considered an "export" of the data, the group said, which is only allowed if the subsidiary can ensure an "adequate level or protection" in the foreign country, the group said Wednesday in a statement.
However, "after the recent disclosures on the Prism program, such trust in an 'adequate level of protection' by the involved companies can hardly be upheld," the group said.
In their privacy policies, some of the largest tech companies say that they will share users' personal information to meet applicable laws, regulations, legal processes or enforceable government requests.
Since Prism's revelations have ripped trough the technology industry and the privacy landscape more broadly, companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter and Microsoft have called for greater transparency in disclosure of data on government requests for customer information.
Yahoo, for instance, has since disclosed some of its user data requests, but companies have had a harder time clearing the way to specifically reveal requests made under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which has been at the center of the Prism controversy.
"For European subsidiaries of the involved companies, American 'gag order' does not apply," the student group said Wednesday, adding, "in contrast to that, the companies are even under an obligation to tell the truth under European proceedings."
Germany, Luxembourg and Ireland must now decide whether it is legal for European companies to mass-transfer personal data to a foreign intelligence agency, the group said.
"We want a clear statement by the authorities if a European company may simply give foreign intelligence agencies access to its customer data," it said.
"If this turns out to be legal, then we might have to change the laws," it added.
In recent weeks, Europe's justice commissioner has pledged that Europeans' rights would not be sacrificed for U.S. national security.
The student group also seeks more clarity from the tech companies on how they handle users' personal data under European procedures.
Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Skype and Yahoo could not be immediately reached to comment on the complaints.
In 2006, E.U. data protection authorities already decided in a case involving the payment processor Swift that a mass transfer of data to the U.S. authorities is illegal under EU law, the student group said.
Google and YouTube were not included in the first round of complaints, the group said, because they do not use European intermediaries.
"But since Google has data centers in Ireland, Belgium and Finland, we can take similar actions on a slightly different path," they said.
Follow me on Twitter @sajilpl
Thursday, 27 June 2013
Prism implicates Facebook, Yahoo and others in Europe, student group charges
The U.S. government surveillance program known as Prism, which reportedly collects data from major technology companies, has compelled a European student group to file a barrage of complaints against the companies, claiming the data collection runs afoul of European privacy laws.
The complaints were recently filed in Ireland against Facebook and Apple, in Luxembourg against Skype and Microsoft, and in Germany against Yahoo. The complaints are directed at the companies’ European subsidiaries.
The Austrian student group Europe-v-Facebook.org said that while the Prism scandal is playing out in the U.S., “most of the involved companies conduct their business through subsidiaries in the EU in order to avoid U.S. taxes.” This means that the companies must abide by European privacy laws, the group said.
The basis of the group’s complaints concerns how the companies export their user data back to their U.S. counterparts. When a European company sends that data back to its U.S. parent company, that is considered an “export” of the data, the group said, which is only allowed if the subsidiary can ensure an “adequate level or protection” in the foreign country, the group said Wednesday in a statement.
However, “after the recent disclosures on the Prism program, such trust in an ‘adequate level of protection’ by the involved companies can hardly be upheld,” the group said.
In their privacy policies, some of the largest tech companies say that they will share users’ personal information to meet applicable laws, regulations, legal processes or enforceable government requests.
Since Prism’s revelations have ripped trough the technology industry and the privacy landscape more broadly, companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter and Microsoft have called for greater transparency in disclosure of data on government requests for customer information.
Yahoo, for instance, has since disclosed some of its user data requests, but companies have had a harder time clearing the way to specifically reveal requests made under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which has been at the center of the Prism controversy.
“For European subsidiaries of the involved companies, American ‘gag order’ does not apply,” the student group said Wednesday, adding, “in contrast to that, the companies are even under an obligation to tell the truth under European proceedings.”
Germany, Luxembourg and Ireland must now decide whether it is legal for European companies to mass-transfer personal data to a foreign intelligence agency, the group said.
“We want a clear statement by the authorities if a European company may simply give foreign intelligence agencies access to its customer data,” it said.
“If this turns out to be legal, then we might have to change the laws,” it added.
In recent weeks, Europe’s justice commissioner has pledged that Europeans’ rights would not be sacrificed for U.S. national security.
The student group also seeks more clarity from the tech companies on how they handle users’ personal data under European procedures.
Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Skype and Yahoo could not be immediately reached to comment on the complaints.
In 2006, E.U. data protection authorities already decided in a case involving the payment processor Swift that a mass transfer of data to the U.S. authorities is illegal under EU law, the student group said.
Google and YouTube were not included in the first round of complaints, the group said, because they do not use European intermediaries.
“But since Google has data centers in Ireland, Belgium and Finland, we can take similar actions on a slightly different path,” they said.
The complaints were recently filed in Ireland against Facebook and Apple, in Luxembourg against Skype and Microsoft, and in Germany against Yahoo. The complaints are directed at the companies’ European subsidiaries.
The Austrian student group Europe-v-Facebook.org said that while the Prism scandal is playing out in the U.S., “most of the involved companies conduct their business through subsidiaries in the EU in order to avoid U.S. taxes.” This means that the companies must abide by European privacy laws, the group said.
The basis of the group’s complaints concerns how the companies export their user data back to their U.S. counterparts. When a European company sends that data back to its U.S. parent company, that is considered an “export” of the data, the group said, which is only allowed if the subsidiary can ensure an “adequate level or protection” in the foreign country, the group said Wednesday in a statement.
However, “after the recent disclosures on the Prism program, such trust in an ‘adequate level of protection’ by the involved companies can hardly be upheld,” the group said.
In their privacy policies, some of the largest tech companies say that they will share users’ personal information to meet applicable laws, regulations, legal processes or enforceable government requests.
Since Prism’s revelations have ripped trough the technology industry and the privacy landscape more broadly, companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter and Microsoft have called for greater transparency in disclosure of data on government requests for customer information.
Yahoo, for instance, has since disclosed some of its user data requests, but companies have had a harder time clearing the way to specifically reveal requests made under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which has been at the center of the Prism controversy.
“For European subsidiaries of the involved companies, American ‘gag order’ does not apply,” the student group said Wednesday, adding, “in contrast to that, the companies are even under an obligation to tell the truth under European proceedings.”
Germany, Luxembourg and Ireland must now decide whether it is legal for European companies to mass-transfer personal data to a foreign intelligence agency, the group said.
“We want a clear statement by the authorities if a European company may simply give foreign intelligence agencies access to its customer data,” it said.
“If this turns out to be legal, then we might have to change the laws,” it added.
In recent weeks, Europe’s justice commissioner has pledged that Europeans’ rights would not be sacrificed for U.S. national security.
The student group also seeks more clarity from the tech companies on how they handle users’ personal data under European procedures.
Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Skype and Yahoo could not be immediately reached to comment on the complaints.
In 2006, E.U. data protection authorities already decided in a case involving the payment processor Swift that a mass transfer of data to the U.S. authorities is illegal under EU law, the student group said.
Google and YouTube were not included in the first round of complaints, the group said, because they do not use European intermediaries.
“But since Google has data centers in Ireland, Belgium and Finland, we can take similar actions on a slightly different path,” they said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)