|Feel the heat? No, feel the cool ...|
Once again the IPKat is indebted to his good and amiable friend Alberto Bellan, who has sampled all the posts and has this to report:
The International Trademark Association (INTA) has held its 137th Meeting in San Diego this year, deep in the sunny south of California. In this post, Jeremy reports on the opening ceremony and speeches.
After an exciting lunch event subtitled "Sex, Drugs, and Motorcycle Clubs: Trademark Issues on the Edge", with speakers advertised as representing the cannabis industry, brands relating to adult content and the Hell's Angels, Jeremy attended a session where various academic papers were presented and debated. The traditional "Meet the Bloggers" get-together then followed
INTA's midwinter European event will be a trip to Rome for two days of very serious discussion and debate on trade marks and geographical indications, says Jeremy -- who attended a planning meeting.
The final day at INTA featured a Table Topic presentation on the subject "The Art of IP Blogging: Effective Social Media Input for Lawyers and their Clients", with Jeremy guiding discussion on the topic. And what does INTA's meeting need to become even better? Find out the blogmeister's suggestions in this post.
Along with the first after-event thoughts, a visit to Ralph's supermarket proved to be the trigger for a number of ideas and observations that brought Jeremy out from behind the facade of the wandering foreign visitor.
Last Thursday IPSoc, the society for junior IP professionals, had the pleasure of hosting Christopher Vajda, the UK judge at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for a meeting entitled “The Interplay between IP and Competition Law: the View from the CJEU”. The society’s Education Secretary, Nick Buckland (Irwin Mitchell), kindly hosted by Eleonora, tells all.
Would you ever confuse major broadcaster's 'Sky' trade mark with VoIP provider's 'Skype'? Well, you might, the General Court says. Jeremy explains.
All Europe has been waiting with eager anticipation the handing down of the decisions of the CJEU in respect of the two challenges by Spain (C-146/13 and C-147/13) to the legality of the Unitary Patent Package. Now the decisions are available, and Darren can't wait to spread the word for the Kat-readership's benefit.
After Darren broke the news of the CJEU's decisions in Spain v Unitary Patent, David summarises the first of these decisions, C-146/13, on the requested annulment of Regulation 1257/2012.
This David's post deals with the second CJEU's decision, C-147/13, which examined the legality of the translation arrangements of Council Regulation 1260/2012.
Following the leak of a full draft version [here], the EU Commission officially unveiled its Digital Single Market Strategy (DSMS). Eleonora explains what it is about.
Daniel Richards pens a piece about the recent England and Wales Patents Court's decision, handed down on 24 April 2015, in IPCom v HTC [IPCOM GmbH & Co Kg v HTC Europe Co Ltd & Ors  EWHC 1034 (Pat) (24 April 2015)]
An anonymous correspondent alerted David to a development which appears to have favoured candidates who appealed a fail result at the European Qualifying Examination (EQE). The timing of this development is unfortunate to say the least, David says, leaving non-appealing candidates at a disadvantage and one day too late to file an appeal.
The Preparatory Committee has launched a Consultation on the proposed fee structure for the Unified Patent Court, Darren reports.
Valentina write up Case C-445/13 P , a CJEU decision regarding a 3-D trade mark consisting of the shape of a bottle and its distinctive character.
What is demanded of an attorney at Oral Proceedings? Can one survive based on one’s knowledge of the European Patent Convention (EPC) and case law, or does one need to be a master of human psychology and emotions? The word goes to Suleman.
******************PREVIOUSLY, ON NEVER TOO LATENever too late 44 [week ending on Sunday 3 May] – Forgotten principles and histories, and the role of complexity in patent law | King's College copyright distance learning Course | Spain, Berne, and the non-discrimination principle | Novartis v Focus, Actavis, Teva | SUEPO keeps demonstrating | Popcorn's blocking injunction | Unprecedented pre-action disclosure application in Arnoldian Big Bus v Ticketogo | World IP Day | EPO's sick leave policy compared | Google wants your patent | "BE HAPPY" trade mark | UK Green Party's Manifesto on copyright law.Never too late 43 [week ending on Sunday 26 April] – C5's annual Pharmaceutical Patent Term Extensions Forum | UPC: patent attorney and client discuss | CJEU’s 2014 report | PUMA v PUDEL | Leaked Digital Single Market Strategy | Again, the EU Patent Package and alleged dangers| EU TM reform | Is Svensson’s new public ok? | OHIM’s rebranding | LV’s pattern as trade mark | EPO and trade unions | Patent and first-mover advantage | Libraries’ right to digitise their collection in Germany.Never too late 42 [week ending on Sunday 19 April] – WIPO Roving Seminars in Israel | Foster v Svenson, or "of taking pictures of your neighbours" | Trade marks and social networks | Jan Rosen on CJEU's public criterion to assess whether linking amounts communication to the public | EU Commission's misinformation about UPC | Dior v (Sirous) Dior | Lyricists and copyright | Banking secrecy v IP rights in AG's opinion for Coty Germany, C-580/13 | Le Monde on the EPO | Bundesgerichtshof's addresses short musical sequences in rap songs.
Never too late 41 [week ending on Sunday 12 April] – Nagoya Protocol for dummies | The IPKat and his friends | Actial Farmaceutica Lda v Claudio de Simone | Article 5(5) of the EU's Trade Mark Directive 2008/95 | Article 16(3) of our beloved TRIPS | Italy v Spain in copyright enforcement online.