Entain has called on the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to review its trade mark registration process for unlicensed operators.
Entain has called on the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to review its trade mark registration process for unlicensed operators.
Entain has called on the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to review its trade mark registration process after identifying at least 14 unlicensed operators that had secured trade mark rights.
In a letter sent to IPO chief executive and comptroller-general Adam Williams, Entain group general counsel and chief customer care officer Simon Zinger said operators serving British consumers without a licence were still able to secure UK trade mark registrations.
Entain said it had reviewed a sample of 18 gambling brands that it believed were serving UK consumers without a Gambling Commission licence and found that 14 did not hold a valid operating licence.
The operator argued that the issue highlighted a potential gap between gambling regulation and the UK’s intellectual property regime.
Zinger said: “The UK trade mark register is currently accessible to operators providing gambling services to UK consumers without a Gambling Commission operating licence. Operating gambling facilities in Great Britain without a licence is a criminal offence under section 33 of the Gambling Act 2005.
“Despite this, entities committing that offence can nonetheless register UK trade marks, acquire the commercial legitimacy that registration confers, and use the UK’s trade mark registration system to sustain operations that Parliament has expressly prohibited.”
The letter highlighted several brands that Entain said held UK trade marks despite lacking a Gambling Commission licence, including one with alleged Russian links.
IPO points to limits of current law
Entain proposed a number of possible reforms. These included considering whether existing public policy provisions within trade mark law could be applied to applicants whose intended commercial activity would be illegal under the Gambling Act.
It also suggested exploring a system that would require gambling operators to provide evidence of a valid Gambling Commission licence before a trade mark could be registered.
Zinger added: “The UK’s intellectual property system is rightly regarded as one of the best in the world. It would be a significant anomaly if that system continued, inadvertently, to extend its protections to operators who have placed themselves outside the law that governs the sector in which they operate.”
In a reply dated 2 June, Williams said the IPO had passed Entain’s concerns and proposals to colleagues responsible for trade mark policy and that officials would arrange a meeting to discuss the issues further.
However, Williams also outlined constraints within the current legal framework.
He said: “Both of the provisions mentioned above can only be used as the basis for an objection where there is an issue within the mark itself.
“The assessment of whether a mark is contrary to public policy, or whether its registration is prohibited in law, relates to the intrinsic properties of the mark itself. This does not involve an assessment of the actions of the applicant or how the mark is used.”
Williams added that there was currently no equivalent trade mark approval system comparable to the Companies House rules governing certain restricted company names.
He also noted that UK sanctions against Russia already extend to intellectual property rights and said: “The IPO has moved quickly to implement sanctions which we are enforcing robustly. The IPO does not accept fees or provide associated services to those on the UK sanctions list, either directly or through their agents.”
Disclaimer
This article is intended for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For advice specific to your situation, please contact our team at T & M Legis for a consultation with our Legal Experts.
