{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Graf Isola","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.grafisola.at\/en\/","author_name":"admin","author_url":"https:\/\/www.grafisola.at\/en\/author\/admin\/","title":"Supreme Court clarifies trademark regulation for comparative advertising - Graf Isola","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"RqCmAVIrva\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.grafisola.at\/en\/en-ilo-intellectual-property-austria-20062011-1\/\">Supreme Court clarifies trademark regulation for comparative advertising<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.grafisola.at\/en\/en-ilo-intellectual-property-austria-20062011-1\/embed\/#?secret=RqCmAVIrva\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"&#8220;Supreme Court clarifies trademark regulation for comparative advertising&#8221; &#8212; Graf Isola\" data-secret=\"RqCmAVIrva\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/www.grafisola.at\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n<\/script>\n","description":"The Supreme Court recently clarified the applicability of Article 12(c) of the Community Trademark Regulation in the context of comparative advertising, ruling that it should be interpreted narrowly and must be employed only in cases where such usage is the only possibility for providing the public with comprehensive information on the marketed goods.&nbsp; ILO Newsletter, [&hellip;]"}