It was common ground between the parties that FIRO was an acronym coined by Mr Schutz in the 1950’s, standing for ‘Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation’. The dispute was over the present ownership of the intellectual property rights in that term. The Hearing Officer dismissed the Section 3(3)(b) ground as misconceived. The opponents failed to prove their case under Section 5(4)9a). Under Section 3(6), however the Hearing Officer found that any trade mark rights in the term (if there were in fact any such rights) had remained with the opponents. The opposition succeeded on that ground.
Judges:
Mr M Knight
Citations:
[2000] UKIntelP o45300
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Intellectual Property
Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.454023