Home » General Interest » Misleading Invoices – the UKIPO fights back

Misleading Invoices – the UKIPO fights back

Keltie LLP

K2 IP Limited

About IPcopy

IPcopy is an intellectual property related news site covering a wide variety of IP related news and issues. We will also take the odd lighthearted look at IP. Feel free to contact us via the details on the About Us page.

Disclaimer: Unless stated otherwise, the contributors to IPcopy (the "IPcopy writers") are patent and trade mark attorneys or patent and trade mark assistants at Keltie LLP or are network attorneys at K2 IP Limited. Guest contributors will be identified.

This news site is the personal site of the contributors and is not edited by the authors' employer in any way. From time to time however IPcopy may publish practice notes, legal updates and marketing news from Keltie LLP or K2 IP Limited. Any such posts will be clearly marked.

This news site is for information purposes only. Information posted to this news site is not legal advice and should not be taken as such. If you require IP related legal advice please contact your legal representative.

For the avoidance of doubt Keltie LLP and K2 IP Limited have no liability as to the content of IPcopy and any related tweets or social media posts.

DSC03616-BFor any avid readers of the IPcopy (hi mum), you will have noticed that the subject of misleading invoices rears its ugly head on a regular basis. To summarise, if you are the owner of an intellectual property (IP) right then you may from time-to-time receive communications that resemble official looking invoices for IP services. Such misleading invoices are sent directly to the IP owner and are designed such that they give the impression to the IP owner that they have to either use the service offered or pay the amount listed, often at inflated rates.

In a positive development in the fight against companies imitating official Intellectual Property Offices, the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) has succeeded in bringing legal proceedings against Mr Aleksandrs Radcuks (trading as ‘Patent and Trade Mark Office’) and Mr Igors Villers (trading as Patent and Trade Mark Organisation), who admitted and settled the UKIPO’s claims of passing off.

Mr Radcuks and Mr Villers are now bound by an Order of the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court which prevents them from committing further acts of passing off and have made a substantial contribution to the UKIPO’s legal costs.

The UKIPO confirms in its publication of 18 August 2014 (link here) that further proceedings are pending against a third organisation.

Pausing only for a brief victory fist pump, IPcopy reminds IP rights holders (whether unregistered or registered) to remain vigilant when addressing invoices that appear to originate from the relevant Intellectual Property Offices, including but not limited to the UKIPO, EPO, WIPO and OHIM.

Should you have any doubts as to the authenticity of an invoice, always check with your professional representative or follow the related UKIPO link here.

[Links to IPcopy’s earlier articles can be viewed here, here and here.]

Nick Bowie 3 September 2014


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: