We hope all of you are staying safe and hydrated during the heat wave currently ongoing in Europe. Below is a recap of the latest news from the Kat-world to keep you fresh and cool:-
Trade Marks
The European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) has recently issued some guidance notes on its approach to classifying items relating to virtual and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). InternKat James Kwong has written a report (here) followed by KatFriend Paolo Maria Gangi’s comments (here) on the EUIPO’s definition on NFTs.
Trade marks enthusiasts will agree that Cadbury’s trade mark applications for its colour purple is one of the highest profile and longest-running disputes in the trade mark world (another which this Kat has in mind is the “Tiffany blue”). In a recent decision of the High Court of England and Wales (Société des Produits Nestlé S.A. v Cadbury UK Limited [2022] EWHC 1671 (Ch)), it seems that the tide of Cadbury’s fortunes has turned with the judge ruling in favour of Cadbury. For more details on this case, please refer to the report (here) written by GuestKats Becky Knott and Jan Jacobi.
There are a few examples in the fashion industry where dormant brands are subsequently and successfully revived, e.g. Balenciaga and Schiaparelli. The issue as to whether it is bad faith to “pay homage” to a fashion brand of the past has been considered in a very recent decision of the General Court of the European Union (Zdút v EUIPO, T-250/21 (NEHRA)). Fashionista PermaKat Eleonora Rosati has commented on this case here.
There has been a discussion of whether all geographical indications (GIs) are intrinsically reputed at a “Track Case Law” webinar delivered by speakers of the EUIPO in the context of an opposition filed by the producers of protected designation of origin “Cava” against three-dimensional EU trade mark “CHENINE Brut PREMIUM CAVA BOTTLE”. GuestKat Anastasiia Kyrylenko offers insights on the discussion here.
Patents
GuestKat Rose Hughes has written a report (here) on a recent decision (J8/20) published by the European Patent Office Board of Appeal which shows that AI is not breaking patent law.
Miscellaneous
The UK Intellectual Property Office has announced new appointments to its board last week. The IPKat would like to take this opportunity to congratulate all new officers, and in particular Adam Williams, who has been appointed Interim Chief Executive of the Intellectual Property Office with effect from 1 September 2022. For further details, please see GuestKat Becky Knott’s report here.
Reviewed by James Kwong
on
Wednesday, July 20, 2022
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