For the half-year to 30 June 2014, the IPKat's regular team is supplemented by contributions from guest bloggers Alberto Bellan, Darren Meale and Nadia Zegze.

Two of our regular Kats are currently on blogging sabbaticals. They are David Brophy and Catherine Lee.

Friday, 8 September 2006

WORLDS APART; PERSONALITY RIGHTS SURVEY


Trademark World

The September 2006 issue of Informa's ten-times-a-year journal Trademark World is now out. Among its features is a cover story by Ian Gruselle (left, Berwin Leighton Paisner) on the impact on trade marks of the impending EU Regulation on nutrition and health benefits (there's not much impact, says the IPKat, unless your trade mark falsely ascribes health-giving properties of the goods on which it is used, in which case it lies right in the Regulation's path and the impact can be catastrophic).

Other attractions for the discerning reader include Dan Bereskin's wry afterthoughts on the recent Canadian Supreme Court's flirtation with some famous marks, as well as a no-nonsense round-up of recent key cases from Japan by seasoned campaigner John Tessensohn (Shusaku Yamamoto).

For full contents of this issue, click here.


Patent World

Meanwhile, Trademark World's sister publication Patent World has also reached the IPKat's letter box. Star attraction, so far as the IPKat's concerned, is yet another sharply focused piece by Addleshaw Goddard's triplets Brian Whitehead, Stuart Jackson and Richard Kempner on Mr Justice Kitchin's recent ruling on inventive step in Ivax v Chugai. Merpel says, it's amazing how a subject like inventive step - which is treated quite briefly and succinctly by the European Patent Convention and national patent laws - has generated wave after wave of masterly judicial pronouncements, guidelines and reviews.

For full contents of this issue, click here


Personality rights survey

The IPKat is pleased to draw the attention of his visitors the following invitation to participate in a survey. The story goes as follows:

Celebrity endorsement is a popular marketing tool, which has considerable benefits (both financial and in kind, such as goodwill and publicity) for the companies promoting their goods or services and for the celebrities attaching their image or reputation to those goods or services. But the scope of the legal protection in the UK for companies, celebrities and the media is uncertain - what rights should celebrities have, if any? What is the position for a company wishing to use a celebrity image - does it need consent or not? What remedies are available?

Gillian Black, a lecturer in law at Edinburgh University, is researching this area and has designed a questionnaire to find out more about current opinion and experience of commercial exploitation of persona, to help determine what the best legal response should be. To have your say, click on this link and complete the online questionnaire. It should take about 10 minutes, and it closes on 18 September 2006.

The IPKat says, this is all in a good cause - so do please try to find the time to complete the questionnaire. He reckons that it takes a lot less than 10 minutes for people who already have strong opinions on the subject. Merpel adds, this gives me a sudden thought: isn't there a bit of a conceptual link between the hijacking of a celebrity's personality and the ambushing of a sports event?

Time taken to fill in celebrity personality survey: 10 minutes, which is also the time it takes to learn Linux, win an XBOX 360 or build a radio
Time taken to be a celebrity: 15 minutes

No comments:

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

Just pop your email address into the box and click 'Subscribe':