Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week

Away last week or too busy to read the IPKat? As usual, don’t worry because our friend and colleague Alberto Bellan is back with his Never Too Late feature, now on its 85th edition.

This is what happened on this very blog last week:

Nicola reviews Edward Elgar's Indigenous Intellectual Property, which addresses IP rights (patents, trade marks, copyright, design, and related rights), in addition to privacy law and identity rights, in relation to – guess whom? – yes, indigenous people!

Mr Justice Arnold addresses the issue of whether the iconic London cab can be a trade mark in The London Taxi Corporation Limited trading as the London Taxi Company v (1) Frazer-Nash Research Limited and (2) Ecotive Limited [2016] EWHC 52 (Ch). Katfriend Jemma Trainor tells the full story.

Trade mark's life is hard to get? No worries! Thanks to this Eleonora's lovely conceptual map you will get a clearer picture of what events may occur in the life of a national EU trade mark, starting from the notion of "sign" to registration and anything after that, ie infringement, invalidity, revocation, and much more.

Trade mark law may be hard, says Neil, but is it even harder to address trade marks in an analytically coherent fashion?

* Mr Justice Arnold foresees no infringing saline use in Actavis' pemetrexed future
If you were at a loss as to what to get that special patent litigator in your life this Valentine's Day, look no further.  Mr Justice Arnold handed down his decision in the latest Eli Lilly and Actavis battle concerning lung cancer treatment pemetrexed disodium, in Actavis v Lilly [2016] EWHC 234, and Annsley takes the floor to recount this romantic, patent story,



Never too late 82 [week ending on Sunday 7 January] – PhD Student Seminar at CIPA | IP meets Antimonopoly law in Japan | German Federal Patent Court invalidates 80% of litigated patents | Inquiry as to damages: no longer a rare avis? | US trade secrets | Trends in IP Data | EPO's new Chief Economist | GIFs and copyright | Katcall for new positions in the IPKat team | Star Wars IP.

Never too late 83 [week ending on Sunday 31 January] – The AmeriKat from the Silicon Valley | INGRES conference on developments in European IP law 2015 - patents | Economics of UK creative industries |Stretchline v H&M | Merck KGaA v Merck Sharp & Dohme | Ethics in IP | Social dialogue at the EPO | Ms Potter's extended copyright | CJEU on TMs' genuine use | Replicating works in museums.

Never too late 82 [week ending on Sunday 24 January] – Economics of legal professions | One shot to boost your EU trade marks | AG's opinion on fair compensation | Enforcement Directive consultation and UPC | Armonised grace period | Draft UK Legislation on Unitary Patent and Unified Patents Court | Arnold J's ruling in KitKat | Linking and copyright | GE moves to Boston.

Never too late 81 [week ending on Sunday 17 January– Talented IP barristers 2015 | Wright Hassall LLP v Horton Jr & Anor [2015] EWHC 3716 (QB) | Economics of Collective Management Organisations | International jurisdiction in online EU trade mark infringement cases | SUEPO officials fired, downgraded | Electromagnetic Geoservices v Petroleum Geoservices  [2016] EWHC 27 | Accord Healthcare Limited v. medac Gesellschaft [2016] EWHC 24 (Pat) | New PCT Applicant's Guide | US Defend Trade Secrets Act.
Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Eleonora Rosati on Tuesday, February 16, 2016 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.