Monday, 25 January 2016
Did you miss the IPKat last week? Don’t worry because - as usual - our dear friend and colleague Alberto Bellan is back with his Never Too Late feature, now on its 82nd edition.
Here’s what happened on this very blog last week:
As the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is launching a study "into legal services in England and Wales to see if they are working well for consumers and small businesses," Nicola the Katonomist thought it might be time to look into the legal profession itself and, in particular, its unusual nature of 'credence good.'
Trade mark owners will soon be given a six-month, one-off window to bolster the scope of their pre-June 2012 CTM portfolios by making an “Article 28” declaration to the OHIM regarding the goods and services covered by their registrations. Former Guest Kat Darren Meale (Simmons & Simmons, London) explains.
* BREAKING: AG Szpunar says that fair compensation for private copying can be funded through state budget but amount cannot be established ex ante
Eleonora reports on Advocate General Maciej Szpunar's Opinion in EGEDA C-470/14 [here], a reference for a preliminary ruling from the Spanish Supreme Court seeking clarification as to whether private copying can be public-funded and, if so, whether its amount can be established ex ante.
Some people think that the Enforcement Directive (2004/48/EC) is not working properly. To have a complete scenario on what's going on with that, the European Commission published a public consultation on it, seeking views from a whole bevy of interested parties about their experiences in enforcing IP rights in Europe. What has that to do with the UPC? Found out in this lovely post by Annsley!
The debate over whether there should be a harmonised international grace period, allowing limited disclosure or commercialisation of an invention before filing a patent application, has rumbled along for many years. FICPI, the International Federation of Intellectual Property Practitioners, is making a concerted effort to reignite this debate, and is urging authorities to reconsider the issue and make provision for a harmonised 12 month "safety net" form of grace period across all major jurisdictions. David reports.
The Intellectual Property Act 2014 contained enabling legislation to allow Government to make the necessary changes to national law in order to accommodate the Unitary Patent and Unified Patents Court by means of a Statutory Instrument (SI), which would pass through Parliament in a simplified procedure. The UK Intellectual Property Office launched a consultation prior to drafting this SI, as reported by the IPKat here. Now, the IPKat has just learned, the Government response to the consultation has been published. The floor goes to Darren.
Following a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) [here and here], the famous KitKat case got back to the High Court of England and Wales, where Arnold J tried to apply the ambiguous guidelines of the CJEU – and wondered how the latter has not really got the questions he had posed. Everything you need to know on this topic is right in this post by Eleonora.
Katfriend and IP enthusiast Nedim Malovic (Stockholm University) provides a recap of what has happened in the fabulous world of linking v copyright since Svensson [Katposts here], and ventures to anticipate what the CJEU might say in the near future.
Some grand IP ideas popped up in Neil's mind, after General Electric company to move its headquarters from the New York suburbs in Fairfield, Connecticut to Boston, in the near-by state of Massachusetts. Is that the beginning of a trend?
PREVIOUSLY, ON NEVER TOO LATE
Never too late 81 [week ending on Sunday 17 December] – Talented IP barristers 2015 | Wright Hassall LLP v Horton Jr & Anor  EWHC 3716 (QB) | Economics of Collective Management Organisations | International jurisdiction in online EU trade mark infringement cases | SUEPO officials fired, downgraded | Electromagnetic Geoservices v Petroleum Geoservices  EWHC 27 | Accord Healthcare Limited v. medac Gesellschaft  EWHC 24 (Pat) | New PCT Applicant's Guide | US Defend Trade Secrets Act.
Never too late 80 [week ending on Sunday 10 December] – Allergan's patent extortion claim, Samsung's damages petition, Revlimid generic settlement & more! | Recovery for pecuniary loss and moral prejudice | EU Trade Secrets Directive | Journal d’Anne Frank as a trade mark?! | New Patent Act in Spain | Yellow as a trade mark in Australia | Innovation is the dirty little secret of IP | David Keltie.
Never too late 79 [week ending on Sunday 3 December] – The politics of IP conferences in India | Australia’s tobacco plain packaging | EU’s no longer a logistical hub for counterfeiters | Patent amendments not allowed during court proceedings in Malaysia | Congratulations, Sir Nicholas Forwood!
Never too late 78 [week ending on Sunday 27 December] – Zer-sum claim and lookalike products | 2015 Copyright Awards | Santa Claus and Section 52 | Jani writes on Dallas Buyers Club LLC v iiNet Limited | IP Hairballs | Actavis v Eli Lilly | Power outage at USPTO | Santa's GC resigns | Pet rock and IP.