|Poor Alice thought that patent|
protection was on the cards ...
"... Alice v CLS Bank ... could give rise to a restriction on grant and enforcement of business method patents. This would be good news to those calling for a drive to improve patent quality to reduce the likelihood of unduly broad patents threatening innovation. The fact that the decision does not preclude software patents in general, but is narrowly focused on business methods leaves room for truly technologically innovative software to remain patent-eligible. Thus new and non-obvious high level functionality implemented in software products can continue to be safeguarded by the patent system against unwanted copying by competitors. This should encourage continuing corporate investment in software innovation".This blog may well carry a further piece or two on this case, which looks likely to generate a considerable volume of interest.
|These balloons are powered only by the hot air|
generated by EU politicians debating the unitary
patent -- but how long will they stay up ...?
Young, enthusiastic IP lawyer in need of a good home. This Kat has recently received an email from a young friend of his, a fellow blogger to boot, who writes:
|Every firm should have one|
"I am an LLB (Hons) and a LLM graduate. Having moved back to the United Kingdom, I'd like to start my career and gain experience within the field prior to starting the LPC, either through a training contract or independently. I have been engaged with IP law for several years and would like to practise in the area if possible; however I am very interested in commercial law as well and would welcome the possibility of working for a firm or even in-house to advance myself and my career. I would be more than delighted to gain that experience either in London or Southern England preferably but, should the right opportunity arise, I would gladly work anywhere in the UK. I am hard-working, intelligent and love the legal field, and would give anyone the perfect person to add to their legal team. I am interested in any positions, even entry-level, which would allow me to utilize my wide array of skills and knowledge."If you think that you have a space for this engaging youngster, please email the IPKat at firstname.lastname@example.org and he will put you in touch.
forward patent citations, as well as a perspective offered by Mike Mireles on what was once the Washington Redskins but which he discreetly refers to as the Washington R_____s. The jiplp weblog carries a forthcoming Current Intelligence note by David Stone and William Corbett (Simmons & Simmons) on the Trunki design case, and Class 46 features a salutary warning from former guest Kat Laetitia Lagarde on why, when it comes to protected denominations of origin and geographical indicators in Europe, it's best not to tangle with Gorgonzola -- even if your name is Gorgo Capra. Finally, there's a lengthy analysis by David Musker of Kohler Mira v Bristan, a rare case on pecuniary and non-pecuniary relief for design infringement, on Class 99.
Lex specialis. "Lex Specialis(sima): Videogames and Technological Protection Measures in EU Copyright Law" is the title of an article by Tito Rendas (Católica Global School of Law, Catholic University of Portugal) which is shortly to be published in the European Intellectual Property Review. Tito was very excited to share the news with readers of this weblog, who are perhaps more comfortable with Latin words like specialis than they are with English words like autopoietic. Anyway, since abstracts are quite the vogue this week, here's Tito's:
You can read this article without having to find an EIPR since it has been uploaded on to SSRN, here.
Article 1(2)(a) of the InfoSoc Directive and the CJEU’s decision in UsedSoft (C-128/11) make clear that the Software Directive is a lex specialis in relation to the former. In Grund (C-458/13), the question arose as to which of the two directives governs the circumvention and distribution of devices to circumvent technological protection measures used in “hybrid products” – works containing computer programs as well as multiple copyrighted audiovisual elements – such as videogames. In its judgment in Nintendo v PC Box (C-355/12), the CJEU, despite the referral made by the Bundesgerichtshof in Grund, briefly addressed this question. Following Advocate General Sharpston’s opinion, the Court stated that the InfoSoc Directive, which confers a more generous protection to TPMs than the Software Directive, should govern TPMs used in videogames. The article critically examines Advocate General Sharpston’s and the CJEU’s (implicit) understanding of the lex specialis doctrine. It argues that a more nuanced understanding of the doctrine is needed in order to aptly answer the question referred in Grund.
Another special Lex