vierama May 12, 2011:

i would recommend to use "AS" - ...read as xyz....

DanitaCZ (asker) May 12, 2011:

It is from the official decision of the IPO in a specific case. I was wondering if it was acceptable to leave this phrase out or not, to me it personally sounded somehow redundant in the text, even though I decided to keep it there in the form of "read", i.e. ...trademark read "xyz". Thank you all for your opinions.

vierama May 12, 2011:

yes, i agree.

Rad Graban (X) May 12, 2011:

IMO I personally find it pointless. Omitting it (in my opinion) doesn't change the meaning of the sentence and including it makes it unnecessarily too wordy. But that's just my opinion. :~)

vierama May 12, 2011:

i do not think that the sentence "ochranna znamka ve zneni ABCDEF" is a legal style. i think the text is only a formal one, maybe linguistic (if the text deals with differences between the two marks from various standpoints - ehymology, semantics, syntax, etc.). then the usage of the phrase "ve zneni" may emphasize the order of the letters in one mark in comparison with the potentionally different order of the letters in the other mark (e.g. Fiesta vs Siesta). such distinguishing features are extremely important in considering whether the mark is mutually interchargeable with (similar to) the other (already registered) trademark. so i think that in this context the phrase "ve zneni" has nothing to do with a legal style.

Rad Graban (X) May 11, 2011:

Should be omitted Too verbose otherwise. See "The Elements of Legal Style" or "A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage".

vierama May 11, 2011:

po objasneni otazky sa priklanam k tomu, ze vsetky navrhy su spravne a prijatelne, a nie je nutne vynechavat "ve zneni" (aj ked je to mozne).