As we are halfway through December, it's never too late to look back at last week's activities on the blog!
TRADE MARKS
When it comes to trade mark disputes, Italian football club AC Milan recently lost a match against German company InterES (and yes, the company name is not intentional). Katfriend Federica Combariati discussed likelihood of confusion and trade mark reputation in her commentary on a recent Judgment of the General Court between the above parties.
COPYRIGHT
The Government of Hong Kong recently released a public consultation paper on updating the national Copyright regime (the "Copyright Ordinance"). InternKat James Kwong has analysed the public consultation in detail and provides his comment.
PATENTS
Permakat Prof. Neil J. Wilkof discussed patent trolling and the long debate about it and whenever this topic might still be relevant and deserving of attention.
GuestKat Sophie Corke reported on the UKIPO's call for views on Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), which seeks to answer the question of whether the current framework needs to change to best support innovation.
Following the decision of the EBA in G 1/21 on the legality of mandatory ViCo oral proceedings, the EPO has continued with ViCo proceedings before the Boards of Appeal. The Office has now also published a report on the user survey of the opposition division (OD) ViCo pilot programme, and GuestKat Rose Hughes has provided us with analysis, comments and thoughts on this.
OTHER
GuestKat Sophie Corke has analysed the new coalition agreement of the German "Ampel" parties (170-page document) and the potential impact it could have on two important topics: digitalisation and innovation. The review of the agreement covers net neutrality, digital sovereignty, access to data (and to research data with a possible link to copyright), new technologies and the impact of the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act in Germany.
SpecialKat Hayleigh Bosher had sent us a review of the book "We the Robots? Regulating Artificial Intelligence and the Limits of the Law" by Simon Chesterman, National University of Singapore. The book looks at recent developments in AI and their actual and potential impact on the legal profession, as well as the challenges, normative questions, tools and opportunities that Artificial Intelligence presents for rules and institutions.
TRADE MARKS
When it comes to trade mark disputes, Italian football club AC Milan recently lost a match against German company InterES (and yes, the company name is not intentional). Katfriend Federica Combariati discussed likelihood of confusion and trade mark reputation in her commentary on a recent Judgment of the General Court between the above parties.
COPYRIGHT
PATENTS
Permakat Prof. Neil J. Wilkof discussed patent trolling and the long debate about it and whenever this topic might still be relevant and deserving of attention.
GuestKat Sophie Corke reported on the UKIPO's call for views on Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), which seeks to answer the question of whether the current framework needs to change to best support innovation.
Following the decision of the EBA in G 1/21 on the legality of mandatory ViCo oral proceedings, the EPO has continued with ViCo proceedings before the Boards of Appeal. The Office has now also published a report on the user survey of the opposition division (OD) ViCo pilot programme, and GuestKat Rose Hughes has provided us with analysis, comments and thoughts on this.
OTHER
GuestKat Sophie Corke has analysed the new coalition agreement of the German "Ampel" parties (170-page document) and the potential impact it could have on two important topics: digitalisation and innovation. The review of the agreement covers net neutrality, digital sovereignty, access to data (and to research data with a possible link to copyright), new technologies and the impact of the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act in Germany.
SpecialKat Hayleigh Bosher had sent us a review of the book "We the Robots? Regulating Artificial Intelligence and the Limits of the Law" by Simon Chesterman, National University of Singapore. The book looks at recent developments in AI and their actual and potential impact on the legal profession, as well as the challenges, normative questions, tools and opportunities that Artificial Intelligence presents for rules and institutions.
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Reviewed by Giorgio Luceri
on
Sunday, December 19, 2021
Rating:
Reviewed by Giorgio Luceri
on
Sunday, December 19, 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