Recent periodicals

The December 2007 issue of Sweet & Maxwell's monthly European Trade Mark Reports is now out. It's pretty fat, but much of the weight can be put down to the annual index. Cases covered in this issue include
* Antartica Slr v OHIM, the Court of First Instance's ruling that Antartica had no right to register the word and figurative mark NASDAQ in the face of the very well-known NASDAQ stock exchange price quotation service;

* Game Group plc v First Internet Technology Ltd, a .eu domain name dispute in which an adverse registrant of the url nearly, oh so nearly, got away with it;
* the ruling in European Court of Justice Case C‑17/06, Céline SARL v Céline SA (see IPKat comments here), that the same principles that govern other forms of trade mark infringement apply equally to alleged infringements through the use of a business name.
As usual, if you know of any interesting European trade mark case that should be reported in full in the ETMR, just email the IPKat here and let him know.

The November issue of the ETMR's little sister the European Copyright and Designs Reports is also available. This issue of the six-times-a-year title contains reports on five cases, including

* ADAGP v Editions Fernand Hazan, a French Cour de Cassation ruling on whether the paintings of the famous impressionist were part of the public domain or if any further copyright could be squeezed out of them;

Right: Monet -- a great painter, but doesn't his garden look a little untidy?

* SCRL Soc. Belge des Auteurs, Compositeurs et Editeurs v SA Scarlet - a Belgian dispute as to whether an internet service provider was liable for an act of copyright infringement following peer-to-peer use.

Recent periodicals Recent periodicals Reviewed by Jeremy on Sunday, November 25, 2007 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.