Thursday thingies

Tefnut, rain goddess
US design protection comes to London.  If you've not yet signed up for next Tuesday's "Life After Egyptian Goddess" seminar, there's still a little more time to do so.  The speaker at this Class 99/CIPA event is Perry Saidman, the venue is the CIPA Hall, 95 Chancery Lane, the date 6 November and the time is 5.00pm till 7.00pm.  There is no charge (i.e., it's free).  A discussion panel consisting of Lorna Brazell (Bird & Bird), Richard Gallafent (Gallafents) and Barbara Cookson (Filemot Technology Law Ltd) will be on display.  Everybody is welcome, particularly those who either think that (i) the US system of design patents is superior to the European scheme for registered and unregistered design protection and (ii) those who think the exact opposite.  To register, email Class 99 team blogger Jeremy here, quoting the subject line "Egyptian Goddess".  There are no further formalities for attendance, other than remembering to do so.

IP Publishers and Editors lunch.  Shifting this event from the run-up to Christmas and relocating it in late November has paid off, since the number of registrants for this splendid event has topped 60 for the first time.  Just to confirm: this year's keynote speaker is Michael Harrison (Harrison IP), who has recently assumed responsibility for the much-improved and increasingly useful CIPA Journal.  If you have not already signed up for this free event, which Simmons & Simmons is kindly hosting in its lovely London office, click here for details.

Golding Essay Prize 2013. The IPKat's good friends at the Competition Law Association (CLA) are offering a prize of £1000 to be awarded for an essay submitted by a student, trainee solicitor, pupil barrister, devil barrister (from Scotland) or trainee patent and trade mark attorney on the following topic:
Is there a role for Euro-defences following Sun v M-Tech
Should there be a role for Euro-defences to intellectual property infringement and, if so, when? A trade mark gives the proprietor the exclusive right to control the first marketing of goods bearing the mark in the EEA. In the recent case of Oracle v M-Tech Data Limited [2012] UKSC 27 [noted by IPKat guest blogger Eleonora here], the Supreme Court was asked to consider the relationship between that right and the treaty provisions relating to the free movement of goods (Arts 34-6 TFEU) and competition law (Art 101 TFEU). It is settled law that there are circumstances in which anti-competitive agreements can render intellectual property rights unenforceable, as recognised by the Court of Justice in Cases C-40/70, Sirena and C-144/81, Keuerkoop. The Supreme Court, however, held that the unlawful conduct alleged by M-Tech was collateral to the monopoly that the claimant was seeking to enforce and therefore that its particular Euro-defences could not succeed. But how far does the impact of the decision extend, does it apply to all intellectual property rights, is it correct, and what are the principles that should be applied (a) at a preliminary stage and (b) at trial?

The essay must be of a maximum length of 5,000 words (inclusive of footnotes) and the closing date for submission of entries is 28 February 2013. Entries should be formatted on A4 in at least 11 point font and 1.5 spacing with footnotes at the bottom of the page, and submitted in electronic form to the CLA secretary, Sharon Horwitz at

Entrants should please place a codeword instead of their real name on the essay and include both the codeword and real name, with confirmation that the author satisfies the entry qualifications, in the covering e-mail. Those already qualified as lawyers whether in the United Kingdom or a foreign jurisdiction are not eligible for the prize and the entry qualifications apply as at 28 February 2013.
Do enter this competition if you can, otherwise the panel of judges will have nothing to read.  And if you win, don't forget to tell the CLA that you heard all about this competition from the IPKat ...

The brain behind the braid. From the IPKat's friends at Petosevic comes news that Russian businessman and marketing expert Stanislav Kaufman has recently obtained a trade mark registration for lollipops shaped like the circular braid traditionally worn by Ukrainian former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. The trade mark Yulkiny Sosulki ("Yulia’s Icicles") has been registered in Russia for lollipops (Class 30). The lollipops will have five flavours and are expected to appear on the Russian market soon.

Kaufman is said to be the brain behind other provocative, politically themed trade marks, namely the Putinka and Volodya and Medvedi vodka brands [noted by the IPKat here] that make reference to the names of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. The lollipop trade mark is reported to have infuriated Tymoshenko’s supporters.

From the IPKat's friend down under, John R. Walker, comes news that the United States Copyright Office is currently seeking submissions in support of its inquiry into art resale royalty rights. According to John, the Copyright Office wants to hear from people and countries that have had direct experience of art resale royalty rights. Further details are available here.  Comments must be received no later than 5pm, Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on 5 November 2012 [it may be that the deadline will be extended on account of the effect of Hurricane Sandy, but the Kat has no direct information on this matter].  Communications should be sent to Jason Okai, Counsel, Office of Policy and International Affairs at
Thursday thingies Thursday thingies Reviewed by Jeremy on Thursday, November 01, 2012 Rating: 5


  1. More on Apple's "apology"

    "Judges amazed as Apple requests two-week time-frame to post notice saying it lost its Samsung legal fight"

  2. No prizes for spotting the startling number of egregious inaccuracies in that report...


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.