Nestle IPR by Prateek
Nestle IPR by Prateek
Nestls
history begins back in 1866, when the first European condensed milk factory was opened in Cham, Switzerland, by the Anglo-Swiss Condensed Milk Company. The Nestl company had acquired profound knowledge of markets all over the world over the previous 130 years. Nestl market their products under six strategicglobal brands: NESTL, NESCAF, NESTEA,MAGGI, PURINA and BUITONI.
75.7% Nestl products meeting Nutritional Foundation criteria 11700 Equivalent tonnes of salt removed by Maggi from its portfolio over the last eight years 44000 Farmers having access to financial assistance from Nestl worth up to USD 37.8 million 39 Factories generating zero waste for disposal 5.4 million Children reached by the Nestl Healthy Kids Global Programme, in 64 countries 100 billion Servings of iodine-enriched Maggi products sold worldwide 489 Water-saving projects in our factories, saving 6.5 million m3 24% Reduction in direct GHG (Greenhouse Gas) emissions since 2002 6692 Renovated products for nutrition or health considerations 690054 Farmers working directly with Nestl 217 Clean drinking water projects in the South Asia region, helping to improve access and sanitation for more than 100000 school children 18103 Employees completing our online human rights training too
Henri
Nestl endowed his company with the symbol derived from his name. His family coat of arms, the nest with a mother bird protecting her young, became the Company's logo and a symbol of the Company's care and attitude to life-long nutrition. The Nestl nest represents the nourishment, security and sense of family that are so essential to life. The Nestl trade mark was first registered in New Zealand in Wellington in 1885
Coyrights: 340 strategic brands protected by 75,000trademark registrations in different countries around the world in accordance with Nestls business interests6,000 local brands protected by 28,000 trade mark registrations
Patents: 9,018 granted patents covering countries on everycontinent6,127 pending patents
funding
Royaltie s
Botteled water Nestl Pure Life, Perrier, Poland Spring, S.Pellegrino Cereals Cini Minis, Cookie Crisp, Estrelitas, Fitness, Nesquik cereal
Nescaf, Nescaf 3 in 1, Nescaf Cappuccino, Nescaf Classic, Nescaf Decaff, Nescaf Dolce Gusto, Nescaf Gold, Nespresso
Buitoni, Buitoni, Herta, Hot Pockets, Lean Cuisine, Maggi, Stouffer's,Thomy
PATENTS
The
World Intellectual Property Organisation(WIPO) announced its list of top patent applicants in2009.Despite the difficult economic climate 0f 2008 year,Nestl continued to invest in R&D and intellectual property and has increased its ranking in the WIPO list has now entered the top 100 and is the top patent applicant for the food and beverage industry. edge technologies and highly differentiated products, solutions and benefits are key to Nestl'sfour growth drivers and its global brands such asNespresso, Nan, Nescaf, Nido and Purina
Nestl
Leading
Protecting
these technologies, products solutions and benefits significantly contributes to sustaining the competitive advantage coming from Nestl's unmatched R&D capability and product and brand portfolio. do this, Nestl files over 250 patent applications per year and manages a global patent portfolio of about 20,000 patents.
To
Capsule
holder US D666456 S1 Use of alpha-keto enamine derivatives as ingredients EP 1157617 A3 Preparation of an acidified milk product in powder form Coffee machine US D495188 S1
Preventing
stickiness of hard-boiled confections EP 1106074 A3 Nutritional Composition EP 2204176 A3 Confectionery tablet US D595477 S1 Chocolate tablet US D637787 S1
Domain
names are used to identify one or more IP addresses . For example, the domain name microsoft.com represents about a dozen IP addresses. Domain names are used in URLs to identify particular Web pages. The website of nestle is www.nestle.in and the domain name is nestle.in Global- www.nestle.com www.familynestle.com
Nestle
prefers trade secrets to protect some of its products or component of products such as Nepresso capsules Maggis spice combination Cerelac production and packaging procedures.
INFRINGEMENT CASES
On
22 April, the IPAB ruled on a trademark dispute between Swiss multinational Societe des Produits Nestle S.A (hereafter Nestle) and Kolkata based Kit Kat Food Products over the use of the trademark 'Kit Kat'. The IPAB noted that Societe des Produits Nestle S.A had been using the 'Kit Kat' trademark outside India since 1935. They had got the mark registered in 1942.
The
IPAB noted that Nestle had provided evidence in the form of an export sales invoice that they were users since 01/11/1987. It had been conceded by Kit Kat Food Products that they had been using the trademark since 1991 only. the IPAB ruled that Kit Kat Food Products' adoption of the trademark was not bona fide and that it was merely an attempt on their part to ride on the goodwill of Nestle. Thus, the IPAB held that Nestle's application be accepted as it was the rightful user of the trademark.
Yunnan-based
coffee producer Hogood Coffee is playing the victim after government employees confiscated Hogood non-dairy creamer. It was illegally using the "Coffee-Mate" name, which in China is a registered trademark of multinational food and beverage giant Nestl. On September 3, around 12,000 bags of Hogood-produced non-dairy creamer packaged under the name "CoffeeMate" were seized by Industrial and Commercial Bureau employees in the Panlong district.
Panlong
officials confirmed the next day that the confiscation was a response to a complaint filed by Nestl
CEO Xiong Xiangru told reporters after the confiscation that the company had no idea that CoffeeMate was a trademark despite it being clearly marked as such on all Nestl Coffee-Mate products
Hogood
German
supermarket chain Aldi successfully opposed Nestl's application to register theKit Kat shape as a trade mark. Nestle had sought to register as a trade Mark Two Four [chocolate] bars attached to one another with a thin base". The trade mark is TM No. 822780 for this A delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks found that the application related to the functional shape of the Kit Kat rather than its recognisable trade mark.
Nestle
argued that the Kit Kat shape distinguished the product from other goods in the marketplace Also provided evidence that 77 per cent of consumers associated the generic shape with the Kit Kat product Cadbury, standing in opposition submitted details of fourteen two and four finger chocolate bars which, it claimed, were on the market prior to the application date of Nestl's marks. Cadbury also relied upon the original refusal of the marks during the prosecution stage
The
global food company expressed willingness to support the advocacy programs of IP Philippines aimed at promoting awareness and respect for IPRs among the Filipino youth. Both Nestle and IP Philippines believe that involving today's youth in the country's program of promoting creativity and innovations is highly instrumental in strengthening the IP regime and achieving national development. The effective management of the Intellectual Property system is vital to the nation's advancement and international competitiveness
WWW.WIKIPEDIA.COM
WWW.NESTLE.IN WWW.NESTLE.COM WWW.GOOGLEPATENTS.US WWW.IPINDIA.COM WWW.WIPO.ORG
THANK YOU