December ETMR now out

The twelfth and final issue of Sweet & Maxwell's European Trade Mark Reports for 2005 has now been published. Cases appearing in English for the first time include
* Clarins Paris SA v Supermercados Sabeco SA (Audiencia Provincia, Zaragoza, Spain), on the availability of damages for commercial and "moral" loss following the sale of luxury brands in downmarket surroundings;

* 100 PANORAMICZNYCH (Supreme Court, Poland) on locus standi for invoking cancellation proceedings and on the assessment of what might be called non-descriptive descriptiveness;

* Adidas-Salomon AG v Patent and Trade Mark Office (Spanish Supreme Court): here Adidas secures the cancellation of a three-striped football-shaped bottle.
There are also cases from the UK, OHIM and the Court of First Instance. The IPKat says "Enjoy!" and reminds you to let him know if you come across any interesting cases that ought to be reported in the ETMR.

Managing Intellectual Property

The November 2005 issue of Euromoney's 10-times-a-year Managing Intellectual Property is full of interesting features. The cover story previews December's World Trade Organization's Sixth Ministerial Conference, which may determine the future direction of the IP/agriculture interface. Staff reporter Sam Mamoudi speculates on the rash of patent cases that might be spreading to the US Supreme Court next year. Also, a triumvirate of Osborne Clarke lawyers (Mark Finn, London; Konstantin Ewald, Cologne; Marie-Helene Lemaitre, Paris) review strategies open to IP owners whose European patent and trade mark rights are vulnerable to central attack.
LATEST ETMR, MIP LATEST ETMR, MIP Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, November 21, 2005 Rating: 5

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:

Powered by Blogger.