Monday miscellany

In "Jumpin' through hoops? A copyright claim that never got off the ground", this Kat hosted a guest contribution from Kevin Winters on a copyright infringement action brought by Jacobus Rentmeester against Nike on the basis that its iconic Michael Jordan "Jumpman" logo (left) infringed his copyright. Now there is a sequel. This Kat has been advised that the trade mark on the right, owned by Oxfordshire-based Orthomobility Ltd -- a company that makes prosthetic devices -- has been registered in Germany.  Thank you Edward Humphrey-Evans (Katpat!) for keeping us informed.

Around the weblogs 1.  One of the most entertaining items to appear on the copyright-focused 1709 Blog for a while is quite an unexpected one: Amanda Harcourt's review of Matthew Billy's podcast about ASCAP, the BMI and Sharkey the seal.  The same weblog carries an obituary for the United Kingdom's private copying exception, solemnly penned by Andy Johnstone.  IP Draughts' Mark Anderson voices some well-aimed criticism at a futile appeal in respect of an agreement governing a selection of Bob Marley works including No Woman, No Cry: "the court at first instance and the Court of Appeal had a relatively straightforward task to interpret the 1992 agreement, and they performed it well. No new point of law arises from the case. There is no guidance that needs to be given to drafters in light of the case. It is an illustration of how far a party is prepared to go to try to protect its business interests, by pursuing a dud case all the way to the Court of Appeal".

Around the weblogs 2. On the Class 46 European trade mark blog, Laetitia Lagarde writes up a neat little decision of the General Court to the effect that earlier MUSTANG word and figurative (right)marks for clothing would not be tarnished by the negative association of a later figurative mark containing the word MUSTANG for cigarettes. The Selvam and Selvam blog has drawn attention to the intention of the Indian Government to amend the Trade Mark Rules 2002 via  the Trade Mark Amendment Rules 2015. These propose, inter alia, to hike filing and prosecution fees by 100% and to empower the Registrar to determine certain marks as being well-known trade marks. Raja Selvam's post is here: objections and suggestions should be sent to the Additional Secretary to the Government of India at sahni.palka at by 18 December 2015.

UCL, on the road again ...
Homeless faculty teaches copyright, offers 29 CPD points.   Convened by the ever-excellent Amanda Harcourt, "Copyright Law: Meeting the Legal Needs of the Creative Industries in the 21st Century" is the title of a forthcoming course at University College London (UCL). Running from Monday 18 to Friday 22 January 2016, its aim is to help young practitioners, advising in accordance with current statutes and existing contracts, to look to the future and explore copyright and related laws in a digital context together with imminent legal developments. The Faculty includes fellow Kat Eleonora, 1709 Blogger John Enser (Olswang LLP), not to mention a healthy pawful of Katfriends.  Indeed, this Kat can vouch for the fact that the other speakers in this stellar faculty are very much worth hearing, too.  There's just one detail to bear in mind: if you are going to commit yourself, it's best not to delay too long since there's a deadline for registration. As the college explains:
As the UCL Law Faculty is currently virtually “homeless” because of building works, the Faculty will be securing an outside venue for this conference. Choice of venue will, naturally, be dependent upon numbers. As a consequence applications for entry from attendees will close on Wednesday 16 December 2015.
You can read more about the course content and download the brochure by simply clicking here.
Monday miscellany Monday miscellany Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, November 23, 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.