Never Too Late: If you missed The IPKat last week

IPKat was always a teacher's pet
Too busy with the back to school season to follow IPKat last week? It's Never Too Late, and the 112th edition is here with what you missed.

* A triple dose of defeat - three antibiotic patents of Cubist revoked in one trial

Darren Smyth explains the three dimensions of  Hospira v Cubist - three patents revoked in one go.

*  Milan Court of First Instance rejects application for 'blank' blocking order

The Milan Court of First Instance has ruled that a blocking injunction can NOT concern a target website along with any possible top-level domains and other sites (without specifying which) associated with it. Eleonora Rosati brings us the case.

* SUPER KAT-EXCLUSIVE: Here's draft Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market

Extra! Extra! Freshly leaked from Brussels, a new draft Directive on copyright.

* Thursday Titbits

Internkat Nick Smallwood presents the weekly roundup of intellectual property news, including ALAI conference, MIP Patent Forum and a plea for a German translation.

* SUPER KAT-EXCLUSIVE: Here's text of draft Communication on promoting a fair and efficient European copyright-based economy

In the second SUPER KAT-EXCLUSIVE report of the week, see the new draft Communication and more detail about the coming Regulation.

* Has Mexico missed the mark on its new opposition system?

The new opposition system in Mexico may come as bit of a disappointment, as Neil Wilkof explains.

* EU General Data Protection Regulation – Part I

What can we expect from the EU's new General Data Protection Regulation? Former Guest Kat Valentina Torelli brings some insight, including the right to be forgotten and the new territorial scope.

* What the pH? A closer look at Hospira v Cubist and daptomycin micelles

IPKat returns to the Hospira v Cubist case to look in more detail at the claim relating to purifying daptomycin by altering by PH.

* My My Mylan: The Trademark Silver Lining for Mylan's EPIPEN

Mylan has recently come under fire for raising the price of the EPIPEN. However, as Mike Mireles points out, this could still be good news for the EPIPEN trade mark. Is any publicity bad publicity?

*  Kasting Kall - InternKats

Are you interested in being part of one the premier cat-themed-intellectual property law and economics blogs on all the internet? Applications for the next InternKats are now open!


Never too late 111 [week ending on Sunday 28 August] Branding and rebranding of infidelity and Ashley Madison | Passive hosting providers and third party content | Safe harbours and the E-commerce directive | BREAKING: Leaked Commission Impact Assessment | GS Media rapid response event | Singapore Copyright reform

Never too late 110 [week ending on Sunday 21 August] | Life after Cartier - the future of blocking injunctions | Irish Court of Appeal ruling on Article 8(3) InfoSoc Directive | Wednesday Whimsies| Court fees - do you know what to pay? | Good news and bad news for bio-pharmaceutical patenting in the United States | HP? Hewlett Packard? The legacy of brands following a split |

Never too late 109 [week ending on Sunday 14 August] EPLAW mock trials | CJEU "flat rate" reimbursement of legal fees in C-57/15 | Transmission or retransmission? | Judgement in Actavis v ICOS | Collective management of copyright for images displayed by search engines | Corporates and #Rio2016 | Global branding

Never too late 108 [week ending on Sunday 7 August] Limerick Competition - the results | UK finally speaks out about the "facts" of IP post Brexit| Is "Deadwood really cluttering up trade mark registers? | Weekly roundup: Friday Fun

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, September 05, 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.