|
Preferably to some IP event |
Looking for some IP fun? Then do not forget to check
regularly the IPKat Forthcoming
Events page, l
ovingly and regularly updated.
The latest addition to the list is the
annual CIPIL
Spring Conference, organised like every year by Katfriend Professor Lionel
Bently (University Cambridge) and chaired this year by Kathero Mr Justice
Richard Arnold.
Our friends at the Queen
Mary Journal of Intellectual Property have
also released their monthly list of events, in the UK and abroad. Take a look here.
What's your number? It's not just the title of a great film, but also the
question that online copyright enthusiasts are likely to ask when it comes to
the number of takedown requests that Google receives for alleged copyright
infringements.
The numbers keep growing constantly and Vocativ notes how in the first week of 2016
the search engine giant received 12.1m requests.
This Kat notes that the number of requests received
in the first week of 2015 was 8.1m. This is something like a 50% increase,
observes Merpel, who also predicts that this trend is likely to remain highly
positive.
Does @chanel belongs to Chanel? Apparently
not. As reported by The Fashion Law, the @chanel Instagram account does not belong to
the legendary Paris-based fashion house (which uses @chanelofficial instead), but to a 20-year-old
Canadian girl named Chanel Bonin instead. Apparently Chanel (Bonin)'s account was first
deactivated and is now back online.
The difference is that photographs which
included Chanel products, eg a hair clip and
the drawing of a girl wearing a shirt with Chanel’s double “C’s” logo on it,
are no longer there.
However this story has resulted in 400 further followers for Chanel Bonin.
|
My Other Bag is ... |
Trade mark parody not an infringement (at least in the US)
As again reported by The Fashion Law, a few days ago a
US court dismissed Louis Vuitton's lawsuit for - among other things - trade
mark infringement against My Other Bag over the latter's canvas bags.
According to Judge Jesse M Furman, in particular, use of Vuitton's
trade marks amounted to a parody.
This Kat has tried to think a bit how a situation like this would
be addressed in Europe. As readers know, currently there is no specific parody
defence in the EU trade mark system, although the recently adopted new Trade
Mark Directive provides that
(Recital 27):
"Use of a trade mark by third
parties for the purpose of artistic expression should be considered as being
fair as long as it is at the same time in accordance with honest practices in
industrial and commercial matters. Furthermore, this Directive should be
applied in a way that ensures full respect for fundamental rights and freedoms,
and in particular the freedom of expression."
Does that mean that there is now a parody defence
in the EU trade mark system? Not really. So this Kat suspects that, while trade
mark use for artistic purposes might be considered OK, is not sure that the same be true
for a use like that of My Other Bag. But what do readers think?
Trying to think about My Other Bag case from the EU perspective, and particularly from the CJEU case law point of view, I'm wondering which particular trade mark function would be jeopardized in this case. I doubt the origin function is actually impaired here. Maybe the advertising function? or the investment function? or the quality function?
ReplyDeleteBest,
Miquel
I guess the CJEU could accommodate any of these :-) However, I think that the investment function may be the one ...
ReplyDeleteDoesn't the MOB mark so nicely placed on the device on the bag hurt the origin function? I would think this is risk of association, as well as famous TM infringement. Would it sell without the LV marks?
ReplyDelete