LATEST ETMR; TWINKLE TWINKLE LITTLE JUDGE

Latest ETMR

The November 2006 issue of the monthly European Trade Mark Reports, published by Sweet & Maxwell, has been published satisfyingly early in mid-October (well done, Sweets).

Judgments reported in full in English in this issue include

* Anheuser-Busch v Budejovicky Budvar (Supreme Court, Stockholm), where the US Budweiser was able to stop its Czech rival using the words Budweiser and Budweis, but not Budvar or Budbrau;

* Spar Slovenija d.o.o. v Eurocity Podjetje Za Transport (IP Office, Slovenia): deals with the likelihood of confusion between the trade mark EUROCITY and a company name containing the word "Eurocity".

Among the English-language cases in this issue are

* ODC Enterprises v Tommy Hilfiger (Irish Patents Office), in which the owner of the TOMMY family of trade marks successfully opposed the registration of TOMMY SPORTS for clothing;

* Novartis Seeds BV's application (Appointed Person, UK), where Novartis overcame the objections of the examiner that its applied-for mark CANTO for flower seeds would be confused with the earlier registered mark ERIC CANTONA CANTO, also registered for seeds.

Above: Eric Cantona exchanges opinions with another footballer over the criteria of likelihood of confusion in European trade mark law.

The IPKat reminds readers from everywhere in Europe that, if they know of an interesting or important recent case that they think should be reported in the ETMR, they should email the IPKat here and tell him all about it.

Twinkle twinkle little judge ...

A survey of High Court judges in England and Wales, published in The Lawyer magazine on 9 October, picks out five judges as "stars of the bench". Between them, they had only one trial decision overturned by the Court of Appeal; their combined success rate is 93%, against an average of 60% for High Court judges as a whole. Of the five "stars", two are Patents Court judges - Mr Justice Mann and Mr Justice Kitchin (neither of whom had any decisions reversed on appeal).

The IPKat says this is truly good news for anyone litigating intellectual property disputes in England and Wales. Well done, says the IPKat. Hmm, I'm not so sure, says Merpel - this approach assumes that the Court of Appeal is always right ...

Judge the stars here

Not just any old IPKat ...

* "Most Popular Intellectual Property Law Blawg" of all time according to Justia rankings, November 2024.

* "Most Popular Copyright Blawg" of all time according to Justia rankings, November 2024.

* PermaKat Eleonora Rosati has been quoted, and the IPKat has also been hyperlinked on the New York Times, April 2024.

* "Best UK Intellectual Property blog" of all time according to FeedSpot, January 2024.

* PermaKat Eleonora Rosati and The IPKat are expressly recommended as sources to follow to get an "unstuffy look at IP issues" according to Legal Business, April 2023.

* PermaKat Eleonora Rosati received the 2022 Adepi Award.

* PermaKat Eleonora Rosati listed as one of the World Intellectual Property Review's "Influential Women in IP" of 2020.

* PermaKat Eleonora Rosati listed as one of the Managing Intellectual Property magazine's "Fifty Most Influential People" of 2018.

* IPKat founder and Blogmeister Emeritus Jeremy Phillips listed as one of the Managing Intellectual Property magazine's "Fifty Most Influential People" of 2005, 2011, 2013, and 2014.

* Recommended by the European Patent Office as reading material for candidates for the European Qualifying Examinations, 2013.

* Listed as "Top Legal Blog" in The Times Online, March 2011.

* One of the only two non-US blogs listed in the Blawg 2010 ABA Journal 100.

* Number 1 in the 2010 Top Copyright Blog list compiled by the Copyright Litigation Blog, July 2010.

* Selected by the United States Library of Congress for inclusion in its historic collections of Internet materials related to Legal Blawgs as of 2010.

* Top Patent Blog poll 2009: 3rd out of 50 in the "Favourite Patent Blog" poll and 2nd out of 50 in the "Most-read" poll.

* ComputerWeekly IT Law and Governance Blog of the Year, 20 August 2008.

* Best of the Blogs, Times Online, 21 August 2008.

2 comments:

AnonymousMonday, 16 October 2006 at 11:41:00 GMT+1
It also fails to take into account cases where parties either don't bother appealing or get permission to appeal and then settle the appeal.

Which happens alot.
JeremyMonday, 16 October 2006 at 16:46:00 GMT+1
The survey also fails to take into account factors such as (i) the level of complexity of the cases allocated to each trial judge, (ii) the capacity of the Court of Appeal to distance itself from earlier cases that a trial judge might feel obliged to follow or (iii) the composition of the Court of Appeal itself, where the number of IP-conscious judges may vary from zero to three.

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