Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

Will publicity rights help the individuals featured in
Kanye's typically tasteless new music video?
The summertime is supposed to be the silly season: the time of year when frivolous news stories come to the fore. It's not been that way this year, but Kanye West is doing his best to change that. Welcome to the 103rd edition of Never Too Late.

Kanye West's 'Famous' music video: publicity rights vs the First Amendment

Kanye West’s music video for “Famous” has sparked outrage for portraying naked celebrities in bed, in the form of life-like wax figures. It is not simply the nudity, but the individuals portrayed, which has led to criticism; Rihanna is seen lying next to former boyfriend and abuser, Chris Brown, alleged serial rapist Bill Cosby is featured, as well as Taylor Swift, Anna Wintour and Amber Rose. Emma Perot considers whether offended parties will be able to seek some remedy/recomopense based on their publicity rights.

* EU Trade Mark owners: Article 28 declarations - have you filed yours yet? 

Former Guest Kat, Darren Meale, of Simmons & Simmons, issues a reminder that you have until September 2016 to file to ensure your pre-22 June 2012 EUTMs cover all the goods and services you think they cover. 

The IPKat was delighted to receive this paper from Prof. Dr. Winfried Tilmann of Hogan Lovells which suggests that it might be possible for the UK, post-Brexit, to nevertheless be involved in the Unitary Patent (European Patent with Unitary Effect or EPUE) and Unified Patent Court (UPC). Have a look at the comments section for some lively debate on the subject. 

Nicola Searle gives her verdict on a new book by Michelle Rakiec and Stevan Porter about the evolving world of IP valuation and damages. "This book is handy for IP-savvy professionals, particularly US-based, who are not au-fait on the financial machinations of IP as an asset."  

Nick Smallwood brings you snippets of IP news: the scale of global counterfeiting, the unitary patent, CIPA Star 2016, Mondelez's challenge to Mars' m&m trade mark in the Swedish courts. 

What next for UK copyright after the decision to leave the EU? Eleonora says losing the dialogue between thoughtful UK judges and the CJEU will be one of the many great losses for UK copyright. The future is uncertain - some thoughtful posts in the comments section explore what might happen next. 

Neil Wilkopf pays tribute to the achievements of this highly respected trade mark practitioner. 

Nicola Searle brings you a summary of three interesting papers about patents from the September issue of Research Policy, a multi-disciplinary journal focusing on economic, policy, management and related issues posted by innovation.


Never too late 102 [week ending on Sunday 26 June]  | Neighbouring rights for publishers | US Supreme Court makes it easier to obtain patent enhanced damages | US Supreme Court in Halo and Kirtsaeng makes IP victory sweeter for successful parties | Enlarged Board publishes decision: EPO President violated judicial independence | Dear Europe... UK leaves the EU | Dear UK... 

Never too late 101 [week ending on Sunday 19 June] Procedure to remove EPO Board Member ends abruptly | Trade mark "bully" | EU Trade Secrets Directive | Cannibalism, Branding and Market Segmentation | A-G Szpunar declares Rubik's Cube shape mark invalid | Apple and the podcast industry | IP Inclusive | Coke defends opposition to 'ZERO' marks

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: if you missed the IPKat last week Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Nick Smallwood on Monday, July 04, 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.