- Ranked among Top-3 in Intellectual Property The Market Leaders 2018
Intellectual property rights portfolio (e.g. trademarks, patents, designs and copyrights) is one of the most valuable assets to many companies. The development of the IP regulatory landscape goes at a very rapid pace, which reflects the intensively changing technological and commercial reality. The rules governing IP are becoming increasingly complicated and internationalised. This imposes significant demands on companies’ ability to comply.
Redcliffe Partners provides advanced and highly specialised IP legal advice to assist businesses in developing, exploiting and protecting their IP potential. Our full-service IP practice covers trademarks and trade names, copyright, patents, designs, domain names, trade secrets and know-hows, as well as related marketing, franchising and unfair competition issues. We represent holders of IP rights before the state agencies and courts in local and cross-border IP disputes in relation to trademark infringements, parallel importation and counterfeiting issues.
Our clients include leading national businesses, large multinational companies, start-ups and individuals. Our industrial knowledge of IP regulatory affairs extends to the sectors in which intellectual property law plays a crucial role and includes pharmaceuticals and healthcare, chemicals, FMCG and food production, TMT, visual art, crafts and design.
Redcliffe Partners also offers assistance with managing and protecting intellectual property rights in other countries through our network of foreign IP experts.
Our expertise includes:
- Drafting IP strategies
- Enforcement of IP rights
- Management of IP rights portfolios (i.e. clearing, application, registration, maintenance of trademarks, domains and design)
- IP due diligence and risk assessment
- National, international and EU registrations
- Transfer, cooperation on and licensing of rights
- Know-how and technology transfer agreements
- Marketing and franchising agreements
- Copyright, patent and trademark disputes