Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week

Were you away and missed the last week of IPKat? Well, here's Never Too Late, number 98, and bang up to date!

* Are academic publishers liable for ginormous damages?

If a US academic author attempts to assign copyright to an academic publisher, but universities own the copyright in articles all along, could academic publishers be in serious trouble? Mark Schweizer explains the current debate.

The draft UPC Code of Conduct has, apparently, answered some of Merpel's questions... but raised many more for the rest of us.

* What does the timing of the US Defend Trade Secrets Act and EU Trade Secrets Directive really mean for companies?

AmeriKat and James Pooley explore the transatlantic implications of the two new legislative measures strengthening trade secrets protection, just before the EU Trade Secrets Directive was unanimously adopted (see below).

David Brophy brings us an impending CJEU reference which queries what happens when the owner of a trademark right has caused uncertainty as to the function of origin. In particular, although it may seem to be a single entity, the Schweppes mark has various owners across the EEA and so parallel importing is a real possibility.

The new transfer process from triage appears not to have opened the floodgates to overwhelm IPEC, but questions remain about the valuation of IP on the Claim Form, particularly pre-disclosure. Annsley Merelle Ward reports, with a little help from Katfriend James Sweeting.

* Thursday Thingies
Thomson Reuters Innovation Survey - India's IPR Policy - Upcoming Events - "McKosher" trade mark opposition - Uggs trade mark dispute - The Not-So-Secret Diary of Andrea Brewster

* To tub, or not to tub? Last chance to comment on Civil Justice Council's expert hot-tubbing survey

Well, the very, very last chance to comment on the concurrent evidence survey is tomorrow

* IP wrangling (briefly) delays Mourinho's anointment as new Manchester United manager

What was the hold up with the Special One's latest deal? Nick Smallwood explores the IP issues at play and the lighter side of personal image and trade mark rights.

Julia Jarzabkowski from the Law Commission formally introduces the new Bill to the IPKat, following its introduction to the House of Lords last week. The new Bill sets out a test for unjustified threats which is almost identical for all patents, trade marks and designs.

* Sir Terence Etherton to be next Master of the Rolls

Darren Smyth brings the good news that a highly experienced IP judge, and the first out gay senior judge in the UK has been appointed as the next Master of the Rolls, commencing in October this year. Congratulations Sir Terence!

* The life and death of the PRINCE Bill

Common law personality rights in the US are not to be extended post-mortem, not even by what Emma Perot points out to be an extremely creatively titled Bill.

* BREAKING: EU Council unanimously adopts EU Trade Secrets Directive

AmeriKat Annsley Merelle Ward reports that the EU Trade Secrets Directive has been unanimously adopted by the EU Council. The Directive is not intended to impede investigative journalism, good faith "whistle-blowing" or free speech, but will create a minimum framework for trade secrets across Member States.

* Book Review: The Competence of the European Union in Copyright Lawmaking

This book by Ana Ramalho a must for copyright policy makers and researchers, says Nicola Searle.

* The Nominative Fair Use "Defense" in Trademark Law: Confusion in the US Circuit Courts of Appeal

Mike Mireless explains the confusing evolution of nominative fair use in Trademarks as interpreted by the various Circuits, in light of the latest interpretation by the Second Circuit in International Systems Security Certification Consortium v. Security University.


Never too late 97 [week ending on Sunday 22 May] "Simply"Trademark victory for M&S | Notable events this summer | Positec - the end of disclosure? | IPEC or bust? | Enfish distinguished in TLI Communications patent eligible subject matter case | The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making, Book Review | UK tobacco plain packaging law - judicial review challenge rejected | IPKat Limerick Competition

Never too late 96 [week ending on Sunday 15 May] Takedown request tactics in Italy | Wines, spirits, cheese & GI infringement | EU report on GI infringement published | Merpel on latest developments at EPO | Does UPC spell disaster for the EPO boards of appeal? | Andy Grove: in memoriam | Friday Fantasies | Has Federal Circuit revived computer-implemented inventions? | AIPPI event on EU trade mark reform | Ex Deep Purple member registers band name as trade mark | Copyright in the telephone directory

Never too late 95
 [week ending on Sunday 8 May] The Economist presents an anti-patent narrative (and is set straight) | UPC Code of Conduct | Period of compensation for trademark violation - Advocate General Wathelet's decision in C-280/15 'Nikolajeva' | Independent Fashion and IP | Italy approaches UPC ratification | Creative franchising copyright - notably of the Klingon language | ITMA discussion of the Trunki decision | IP Challenges in Bio-Pharmaceuticals | Tobacco Products Directive is valid, according to CJEU | Universal Music score summary judgment against IFP

Never too late 94 [week ending on Sunday 1 May] - Vantablack: is it possible to have rights over a colour? | Anne Frank's diary & geoblocking | Magic Leap lampoons Google Glass | Arnold's decision in Richter Gedeon Vegyeszeti Gyar RT v Generics| US Trade Secrets Act passes House | Publishing and the Machine| DSM Communication on Platforms leaked!| Google Books legal saga ends | s52 CPDA repeal comes into force 28 July 2016 | The latest Jack Wills v House of Fraser judgment
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Ellie Wilson on Monday, May 30, 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.