Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

Were you too busy hiding from Cruella de Vil and her goons to read the IPKat last week? Not to worry, the 101st edition of Never Too Late is here to bring you up to speed.

Procedure to remove Board of Appeal member from office ends - after reports of attempts to nobble the Enlarged Board

Merpel brings you the news that the Administrative Council of the European Patent Office has, for the third time, sought to remove one of the members of the enlarged Board of Appeal. Merpel sees this is an outrageous attempt to 'nobble' people acting in a judicial capacity (and judging by the comments section most of you agree).

The Metaphorical Trademark "Bully": A Problem? 

Mike Mireles explores both sides of the coin - does the system by and large work, or does something need to be done about overly aggressive trade mark enforcement against the little guy?

Wednesday Whimsies

Ellie Wilson brings you the highlights from Taylor Wessing's Global Intellectual Property Index report, which assesses how effectively IP rights can be obtained, exploited, enforced and attacked across different jurisdictions. Gold went to the Netherlands, silver to Germany and bronze to the UK.

EU Trade Secrets Directive to come into force on 5 July 2016 

The Amerikat's sleepless nights are over, as the EU Trade Secrets Directive is finally published. It will come into force on 5 July 2016, after which Member States will have two years to implement it.

Cannibalism, Branding and Market Segmentation 

The Katonomist's guide to (1) cannibalisation: when a firm's new product compromises sales of an existing product and (2) market segmentation: trying to divide and target different sets of customers based on common characteristics. The Katonomist rounds off her analysis with a discussion of the IP implications and a glass of chianti.

AG Szpunar says that time-limited e-lending is allowed under EU law and interpretation of copyright norms must evolve with technology 

Eleonora explores the legal issues connected with the lending of e-books through libraries, as discussed by the AG in Vereniging Openbare Bibliotheken v Stichting Leenrecht, C-174/15.

Advocate General Szpunar considers Rubik's Cube shape mark invalid 

Another look at AG Spuznar's legal analysis. Ádám György of Hungarian firm SBGK takes up the story of the Rubik's cube shape mark.

Apple and the podcast industry: a better future or no future? 

Why is a podcast called a podcast? Ask Apple. Neil Wilkof ponders the role that Apple will play in the future of the podcast industry.

LGBT or ally in Intellectual Property? Then this is for you... 

IPKat has reported a couple of times (here and here) on the IP Inclusive initiative, working for diversity and inclusivity within the intellectual property industries. Darren now brings you news of IP Out - a new networking group for LGBT people and “straight allies” working in Intellectual Property.

Coke defends against opposition to 'ZERO' trade marks

Emma Perot explores Coca-Cola's strategy in defending its ZERO trade marks in a recent USPTO case. 


Never too late 100 [week ending on Sunday 12 June] 5G wireless technology | European Commission Update: Revised SPC tender now open | CJEU considers implemetation of the private copying exception | CJEU gives guidance for communication to the public cases  Google's fair use defence succeeds against Oracle | The state of patent valuation | EPO's plans to restrict post-service employment | Tuesday tiddlywinks (pirates and cake)| Is obscurity a greater threat than piracy? | Justice Slade delivers judgement in Arthur J Gallagher Services v Skriptchenko 

Never too late 99 [week ending on Sunday 5 June] German Constitutional Court sends sampling saga into another loop | Who should pay for the independence of the Boards of Appeal? | Sorry not sorry - Justin Bieber and Skrillex deny copying | CJEU gives guidance for communication to the public cases  Series marks are a bundle of separate marks, says Court of Appeal | Paying for peace of mind? C-567/14 | Life as an IP Lawyer: Dusseldorf, Germany | ISP's delay in removing content can remove safe harbour | Avengers: when is confusion not confusion? | De Minimis sampling of sound recordings is not infringing, says Ninth Circuit

Never too late 98 [week ending on Sunday 29 May] Are academic publishers liable for ginormous damages? | Update on UPC's draft code of conduct | Implications of new EU and US trade secret legislation | CJEU reference over Schweppes trade mark | New transfer and triage process for IPEC| Thursday Thingies | IP (Unjustified Threats) Bill: from the horses mouth | New Master of the Rolls | PRINCE's personality rights | EU Council adopts Trade Secrets Directive | Book review (copyright lawmaking) | Nominative Fair Use defence in trade mark law

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: if you missed the IPKat last week Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Nick Smallwood on Tuesday, June 21, 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.