WARNING: This is Version 1 of my old archive, so Photos will NOT work and many links will NOT work. But you can find articles by searching on the Titles. There is a lot of information in this archive. Use the SEARCH BAR at the top right. Prior to December 2012; I was a pro-Christian type of Conservative. I was unaware of the mass of Jewish lies in history, especially the lies regarding WW2 and Hitler. So in here you will find pro-Jewish and pro-Israel material. I was definitely WRONG about the Boeremag and Janusz Walus. They were for real.
Original Post Date: 2008-10-31 Time: 14:00:17 Posted By: Jan
By Angela Quintal & Fiona Ford
You can take our members, but you can’t take our name. That is the view of the African National Congress, which is prepared to go to court to protect the 96-year-old brand.
With news that former members of the ANC planned to call their breakaway the South Africa National Congress, ANC leaders were hard at work on Thursday to ensure that a legal challenge could be mounted at a moment’s notice.
Although the so-called dissidents – led by Terror Lekota and Mbhazima Shilowa – prefer the SA National Congress, it is yet to be registered with the Independent Electoral Commission. A second name choice is the South Africa National Convention.
Either name will have to be approved in terms of the electoral law by chief electoral officer Pansy Tlakula.
She may choose not to register a party “if its name, abbreviation or emblem resembles that of another party sufficiently to deceive or confuse voters”.
The IEC said on Thursday no one had tried to register SANC.
But the ANC appears prepared to act and not to leave it in the hands of the IEC to decide.
Senior party leaders are up in arms about the proposed names and have demanded that officials take legal action.
They say neither option will be acceptable, because they include the ANC initials, and are calculated to confuse voters.
It was also not clear whether the ANC would try to steal a march on the dissidents by registering the names as its own as alternative trademarks.
Asked what action, if any, the ruling party intended to take, ANC spokesperson Jessie Duarte said she was not in a position to comment at this stage.
A trademark lawyer, Eben van Wyk, of Cliffe Dekker Hoffmeyr, said that a political party was not immune to the country’s trademarks law.
It would have to choose its name, logo and colour combinations in line with the Trade Marks Act.
He said a search of the Trade Marks Office Register had revealed that the ANC was the owner of the ANC and African National Congress trade marks, as well as numerous ANC logos in South Africa.
“The ANC has no doubt built up a considerable repute in its trademarks in South Africa (and worldwide) and these trademarks might be considered to be well-known trademarks in terms of the Trade Marks Act,” said Van Wyk.
“The ANC is, therefore, protected – as is any other trademark proprietor – against infringement of its trademark rights and may prevent the use or registration of trademarks that are confusingly similar to its trademarks.”
Van Wyk said it should also be noted that a colour trademark could be registered and protected in South Africa if it could perform the trademark function of distinguishing the products or services for which it was used from those of another entity.
“Although it appears as if the ANC has not registered the combination of yellow, black and green as a colour trademark, common law rights have certainly vested in this colour combination and the new political party may even be prevented from using this colour combination.”
Shilowa last night declined to comment on the fact that the ANC was considering legal action to protect its name.
“I want to concentrate on a successful convention for now that makes this dream we are tapping into become a reality; the rest will follow,” he said.