header_logo
cancel1

Argentina

Last Verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      According to the Patent Law, inventions are protected through patents and utility models. As compared with patents, no inventive activity is required for utility model protection. Through a different law (Design Law), industrial model protection is available. This protection is directed exclusively to the ornamental features and/or appearance of an object.   

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      Computer methods are currently protected by copyright. Argentina has ratified and is a member of the TRIPS Agreement. Argentine Law No. 25.036 added to article 1 of Copyright Law No. 11.723 expressly includes the protection of software, granting the latter protection as a copyright.

      However, there are cases where computer programs together with a machine were considered as involved in the patent scope.

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      Patent law grant remedies 

      In connection with civil actions: patent holders can claim the offender to stop using the patent, as well as a compensation and also precautionary measures, such as merchandise seizure.

      The compensation aims to repair the damage, and since the patent law does not indicate how the judge should estimate the damage, civil law is applicable subsidiarily. 

      According to the civil law, the compensation can cover: general damages, loss of profits and non-material damage. The judge will be the one to decide the amount of the compensation in each different case.

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      “Patent exhaustion doctrine” is recognised in sections 36 and 37 of the Patent Law, which provide several specific circumstances.

      According to the Patent exhaustion doctrine sale of a patented article without any conditions attached ends the patentee's monopoly right to control its use. First unrestricted sale of a patented item exhausts the patentee's control over that particular item. However, the control may be exercised by limitations in a contract or licence provided it does not amount to anticompetitive patent misuse.

      The right to manufacture, the right to sell and the right to use are each substantive rights, and may be granted or conferred separately by the patentee. But, in the essential nature of things, when the patentee, or the person having his rights, sells a machine or instrument whose sole value is in its use, he receives the consideration for its use and he parts with the right to restrict that use. The article passes without the limit of the monopoly. That is to say, the patentee or his assignee having in the act of sale received all the royalty or consideration which he claims for the use of his invention in that particular machine or instrument, it is open to the use of the purchaser without further restriction on account of the monopoly of the patentees. [Adams v Burke, 84 U.S. 453 (U.S. 1873)]

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      The main problem affecting trademark owners in our country is counterfeiting. However, in recent years there have been strong and important measures taken to resolve this matter, such as raids on the illegal fair known as "La Salada", considered as the largest illegal fair in the world, where 50 per cent of the clothes sold have counterfeit trademarks. 

      Additionally, the federal judges who are in charge of actions against counterfeiters are very efficient in handling these cases.

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      As a member of the TRIPS Agreement, the use of precautionary measures and raids against illegal merchandise have been successful. Additionally, the use of the registration of trademarks at Customs, through the “Customs Alert System”, has also been an excellent tool in combatting counterfeiting.

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      The criminal actions for copyright infringments are foreseen in Law 11.723 in articles 71, 72, 72 Bis, 73, 74.

      Article 71 provides a generic sanction against those who breach copyright. The penalty is from one month to six years of imprisonment.

      Lastly, articles 73 and 74 provide criminal sanctions that are mitigated for certain acts.

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      The major change is in connection with the opposition trademark procedure.

      In the previous system when an opposition was filed the applicant had to file a court action to obtain the removal of an objection if no amicable agreement was reached.

      As from 18 September 2018, the entry into force of Decree No. 27/2018 and INPI Resolution No. P-183 establishes a new procedure.

      Under this new system, the applicant and the opponent have to reach an amicable settlement within three months as from the date in which the applicant has been notified of the opposition.

      After this period, the Trademarks Office notifies those opponents who have not withdrawn their opposition to maintain the effect of the opposition to the trademark registration by ratifying the same and paying an additional fee within a non-extendable period of 15 working days, and, within that same period, to extend the grounds for their opposition with additional arguments for their purported right and offer the evidence they deem relevant.

      Within 15 working days of the conclusion of this period, and regardless of whether the opponents have expanded the grounds of their opposition, the Trademarks Office notifies the applicant of every opposition that is still effective and of any additional arguments, and the applicant is given a non-extendable period of 15 working days to individually reply to each opposition and provide the evidence the applicant deems appropriate.

      The evidence filed by both parties is considered jointly and decided after this 15-day period by the Trademarks Office. Once the parties have been notified of this decision, they have 40 working days to submit their evidence regarding the oppositions.

      Upon submission of the evidence or expiration of the submission period, and before the Trademarks Office issues a decision on the appropriateness of the opposition, provided there are no previous procedural issues to be resolved, the parties are given a common period of 10 working days to submit a voluntary writ containing their final arguments.

      Within this 10-day period, the parties may report that they have initiated a mediation or conciliation process, or an alternative method of conflict resolution, offering the necessary proof of this process. This report is submitted in the form of a joint writ and, in the event that the parties agree to mediation or a similar process, the 10-day period is suspended for both parties for a period of 30 working days as of the submission of the joint writ.

      Within this 30-day period the parties must finalise the agreed mediation, conciliation or alternative method of conflict resolution. Subsequent to this 30-day period, a new 10-working-day period automatically starts running, with the same effect and scope as the suspended one. If the parties have resolved the conflict by way of the chosen process, this is reported to the Trademarks Office before expiry of the specified term, along with evidence of this result. In the event that the parties resolve the dispute by way of the chosen process, the Trademarks Office will not issue a decision on the dispute, given that the parties have already resolved the matter themselves. However, the parties' agreement will not bind the Trademarks Office to a particular outcome in respect of the granting of the trademark application.

      Upon expiration of the 10-day term, if the case has not been previously dismissed, the Trademarks Office issues its decision regarding any oppositions to the trademark application that are still in effect, including stating whether or not these oppositions were well founded.

      To appeal the Trademarks Office’s final decision, a direct appeal must be made to the Trademarks Office within 30 working days of the notification of the decision. The appeal must be accompanied by payment of the relevant administrative fees.

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      In the case Germaiz SA v Bonomelli SRL it was clearly established that a local company should have known of the existence of an identical foreign trademark when filing a trademark application. In this particular case, the court stated that Germaiz “could not ignore the pre-existence of an identical foreign mark” since its rights could not be based on the “miraculous coincidence” of choosing an identical name for products in the same line of business. The latter ratifies was is specifically established by article 24(b) of the Argentine Trademark Law No. 22,362, which provides that a trademark is null when, at the time of the filing of the application, the applicant knew or should have known that it belonged to a third party.

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      Civil remedies against cybercrime are not specifically foreseen. However, in our legal system according with article 1716 of the Civil and Commercial Code, the violation of the duty of no damaging another person, or the failure to fulfil an obligation provokes the repair of the damage caused. 

      Argentina has a public prosecutor's office specialising in cybercrime.

      The Law No. 26.388 added new criminal offences to the Penal Code related to cybercrime, such as: the unauthorised access to the computer system or database, improper publication of an electronic communication, computer fraud and computer damage.

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

    • Argentina

      Argentine Law No. 25.156 of Defence of Competition specifically establishes that behaviour is forbidden and will be sanctioned according to the rules of this law, if it relates to the production or exchange of goods and services, the purpose of which is to limit, restrict, fake or distort competition or access to the market, or that constitutes abuse of a dominant position in the market that may result in damage to the general economic interest.

      The latter also applies to any type of agreement, including licence agreements.

      Last verified on Tuesday 4th June 2019

Latin Lawyer gives you a fantastic platform to promote your legal expertise to our extensive readership base

Become an author

Contributing editors

Authors