Patent
The breaking news last week was the German Constitutional Court’s decision to reject the constitutional complaint against the Unified Patent Court (UPC). GuestKat Léon Dijkman analysed this decision to see whether there is still a future for the UPC.
Rose Hughes commented on the recent hearing in G1/21 concerning the legality of video-conference (ViCo) proceedings in the EPO’s Boards of Appeal (EBA). The decision itself has also become available recently. The post also provides a useful recap on all events, which lead to the July 2021 hearing.
Rose followed with a post on the EBA’s decision concerning double patenting. Double patenting is a situation where more than one European patent application, having the same filing date and applicant, and directed to the same subject matter, are granted. The EBA, basing itself on the European Patent Convention’s travaux préparatoires, found justification to prohibit double patenting.
Kat Friend James Nurton prepared an event report on the joint seminar on standard essential patents (SEPs), organised by The IPKat and the London School of Economics. The panellists discussed the Unwired Planet litigation [see The IPKat post here], the ETSI IPR Policy, and, indeed, what a standard even means. James finished the event report by mentioning that the panellists were calling for more guidance for the SEPs - and it seems that the European Commission will answer their prayers with a new legislative framework.
Copyright
SpecialKat Chijioke Okorie updated The IPKat readers on the forthcoming amendments to the Nigerian Copyright Bill, now transmitted to the National Assembly. Although the text of the amending Bill is not yet available, Chijioke foresees that it will cover issues such as the right of remuneration, implementation of the Marrakesh Treaty and of the Beijing Treaty.
Other
Chijioke also commented on the decision of the in Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd v Advertising Regulatory Board NPC & Others, issued by a High Court in South Africa. The judgment covers the issue of the extent of the powers of the Advertising Regulatory Board (‘ARB’) in matters relating to trade mark and copyright laws. The Court discussed the interpretation of such notions as “exploitation of advertising goodwill” and “imitation” in advertising.
Never Too Late: if you missed The IPKat last week
Reviewed by Anastasiia Kyrylenko
on
Sunday, July 18, 2021
Rating:
Reviewed by Anastasiia Kyrylenko
on
Sunday, July 18, 2021
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn ![[Guest post] Can AI be considered a PHOSITA? Policy debates in the US and the EU](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggxDO6mW5r4n3-06Af5ckmIaMIhzgPJBoDP8AUsSYXY2zajUQt1ObGVn_GhCgidbG_YDVnybQuJ5XoAjjBG9Ws2xJWDQHNPMrLkn526SWIG371X_Kjt1E8tJmn8Ae_20Phyphenhyphen09JeuUOhhTR3aZE9lMRQlqHGQGcAWGxlo91rrKcLk0AfUjWCvw6RQ/s72-c/Two-cats-eating.jpg)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html