Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week ...

Feel the heat? No, feel the cool ...
The 45th weekly listing of the previous week's Katposts should be really handy for many of our readers, who have been shuttling back and forth to San Diego for the INTA Meeting and home again. This Kat had it lucky, since San Diego is just one direct flight away from his native London, but he spoke to many registrants whose journey required two or even three flights, in some cases spanning more than a day.  If you were one of those people and missed a batch of Katposts, you can check them all out below.

Once again the IPKat is indebted to his good and amiable friend Alberto Bellan, who has sampled all the posts and has this to report:
The International Trademark Association (INTA) has held its 137th Meeting in San Diego this year, deep in the sunny south of California. In this post, Jeremy reports on the opening ceremony and speeches.

* A Kat visits #INTA15: Monday's mewsings

After an exciting lunch event subtitled "Sex, Drugs, and Motorcycle Clubs: Trademark Issues on the Edge", with speakers advertised as representing the cannabis industry, brands relating to adult content and the Hell's Angels, Jeremy attended a session where various academic papers were presented and debated. The traditional "Meet the Bloggers" get-together then followed


* A Kat visits #INTA15: Tuesday tribulations

INTA's midwinter European event will be a trip to Rome for two days of very serious discussion and debate on trade marks and geographical indications, says Jeremy -- who attended a planning meeting.


* A Kat visits #INTA15: Wednesday wind-up

The final day at INTA featured a Table Topic presentation on the subject "The Art of IP Blogging: Effective Social Media Input for Lawyers and their Clients", with Jeremy guiding discussion on the topic.  And what does INTA's meeting need to become even better? Find out the blogmeister's suggestions in this post.  


* A Kat visits #INTA15: the Aftermath, and a trip to Ralph's

Along with the first after-event thoughts, a visit to Ralph's supermarket proved to be the trigger for a number of ideas and observations that brought Jeremy out from behind the facade of the wandering foreign visitor.


* Soc it to ‘em! Judge Vajda on IP, competition and life at the CJEU

Last Thursday IPSoc, the society for junior IP professionals, had the pleasure of hosting Christopher Vajda, the UK judge at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for a meeting entitled “The Interplay between IP and Competition Law: the View from the CJEU”. The society’s Education Secretary, Nick Buckland (Irwin Mitchell), kindly hosted by Eleonora, tells all.


* The Skype's the limit: Sky ousts rival brand

Would you ever confuse major broadcaster's 'Sky' trade mark with VoIP provider's 'Skype'? Well, you might, the General Court says. Jeremy explains.


* BREAKING NEWS: CJEU rejects Spain's objections to the Unitary Patent Package

All Europe has been waiting with eager anticipation the handing down of the decisions of the CJEU in respect of the two challenges by Spain (C-146/13 and C-147/13) to the legality of the Unitary Patent Package. Now the decisions are available, and Darren can't wait to spread the word for the Kat-readership's benefit.


* CJEU refuses to throw España in the works – part I

After Darren broke the news of the CJEU's decisions in Spain v Unitary Patent, David summarises the first of these decisions, C-146/13, on the requested annulment of Regulation 1257/2012. 


* CJEU refuses to throw España in the works – part II

This David's post deals with the second CJEU's decision, C-147/13, which examined the legality of the translation arrangements of Council Regulation 1260/2012.


* The Digital Single Market Strategy: too many (strategic?) omissions

Following the leak of a full draft version [here], the EU Commission officially unveiled its Digital Single Market Strategy (DSMS). Eleonora explains what it is about.


* IPCom v HTC in Patents Court: judge hands first round to HTC

Daniel Richards pens a piece about the recent England and Wales Patents Court's decision, handed down on 24 April 2015, in IPCom v HTC [IPCOM GmbH & Co Kg v HTC Europe Co Ltd & Ors [2015] EWHC 1034 (Pat) (24 April 2015)]


* A day late and a dollar short: EQE appeal outcome favours the brave

An anonymous correspondent alerted David to a development which appears to have favoured candidates who appealed a fail result at the European Qualifying Examination (EQE). The timing of this development is unfortunate to say the least, David says, leaving non-appealing candidates at a disadvantage and one day too late to file an appeal. 


* Preparatory Committee launches consultation on the UPC Fees

The Preparatory Committee has launched a Consultation on the proposed fee structure for the Unified Patent Court, Darren reports.


* Norms of the sector and three-dimentional marks' distinctiveness: a complicated relationship.

Valentina write up Case C-445/13 P , a CJEU decision regarding a 3-D trade mark consisting of the shape of a bottle and its distinctive character.


* European Patent Office Oral Proceedings: ambushes, emotions and human psychology

What is demanded of an attorney at Oral Proceedings? Can one survive based on one’s knowledge of the European Patent Convention (EPC) and case law, or does one need to be a master of human psychology and emotions? The word goes to Suleman.


Never too late 44  [week ending on Sunday 3 May] – Forgotten principles and histories, and the role of complexity in patent law | King's College copyright distance learning Course | Spain, Berne, and the non-discrimination principle | Novartis v Focus, Actavis, Teva | SUEPO keeps demonstrating | Popcorn's blocking injunction | Unprecedented pre-action disclosure application in Arnoldian Big Bus  v Ticketogo | World IP Day | EPO's sick leave policy compared | Google wants your patent | "BE HAPPY" trade mark | UK Green Party's Manifesto on copyright law.

Never too late 43 [week ending on Sunday 26 April] – C5's annual Pharmaceutical Patent Term Extensions Forum | UPC: patent attorney and client discuss | CJEU’s 2014 report | PUMA v PUDEL | Leaked Digital Single Market Strategy | Again, the EU Patent Package and alleged dangers| EU TM reform | Is Svensson’s new public ok? | OHIM’s rebranding | LV’s pattern as trade mark | EPO and trade unions | Patent and first-mover advantage | Libraries’ right to digitise their collection in Germany.

Never too late 42 [week ending on Sunday 19 April] – WIPO Roving Seminars in Israel | Foster v Svenson, or "of taking pictures of your neighbours" | Trade marks and social networks | Jan Rosen on CJEU's public criterion to assess whether linking amounts communication to the public | EU Commission's misinformation about UPC | Dior v (Sirous) Dior | Lyricists and copyright | Banking secrecy v IP rights in AG's opinion for Coty Germany, C-580/13 | Le Monde on the EPO | Bundesgerichtshof's addresses short musical sequences in rap songs.   
Never too late 41 [week ending on Sunday 12 April] – Nagoya Protocol for dummies | The IPKat and his friends | Actial Farmaceutica Lda v Claudio de Simone | Article 5(5) of the EU's Trade Mark Directive 2008/95 | Article 16(3) of our beloved TRIPS | Italy v Spain in copyright enforcement online. 
Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week ... Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week ... Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, May 11, 2015 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.