The InternKat brings you a further highlight of recent posts by the IPKat’s cousin blogs.
(1) the 2nd edition of the study on IPR-intensive industries and economic performance in the EU;
 |
| Follow the intern, travel around the weblogs |
In addition, two trade mark cases are brought to readers’ attention by Tiina Komppa and Laetitia Lagarde: The Finnish “sealed” marks case (the decision is in Finnish) involving unfair business practice; and the EUTM FITNESS case focussing on belated evidence in EUIPO invalidity proceedings.
2. MARQUES Class 99 would like to draw readers’ attention to WIPO’s Seminar on The Hague System for the International Registration of Industrial Designs, at the headquarters of WIPO, Geneva, November 10, 2016.
3. What happened in Latin America? Patricia Covarrubia blogged on IP Tango a readable “conflict of hymns” between two football clubs from Mexico and Spain, discussing whether or not the “similar” song that caused “discomfort” is an infringement of copyright. Moreover, Patricia wrote another post about the national Technology Transfer (TT) plan in Peru, including her opinion on why IP matters for TT.
4. “It's a well-known myth that legal advice is unaffordable.” Is that so? Well, SOLO IP announced that the myth has been dispelled by Sean Dennehey and the IP pro bono scheme! For those who find themselves threatened or abused but don't have the resources to cope, the scheme provides professional supports from fully qualified members of the Chartered Institutes of Patent Attorneys and of Trademark Attorneys and the IP Lawyers Association. See more details here.
Meanwhile, Sally Cooper relates her story of being “horrified by European wisdom on the beauty care regime”, discussing the surprising position of beauty care products -- not regarded by the General Court as being fashion products!
5. Tibbie McIntyre writes in The 1709 Blog on a number of items, including Ed Sheeran et al’s lawsuit of his hit “Photograph”, the inapplicability of the doctrine of exhaustion of distribution rights in computer software for back-up copies, and Electronic Frontier Foundation’s urge for reforming the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s pro-DRM provisions.
In the same blog, former GuestKat Marie-Andree Weiss brings readers her insights on the French law for a Digital Republic (Loi pour une République Numérique). In addition, the ever-productive Marie-Andree writes another post about French Representatives' discussions on the EU Commission Copyright Proposal. “This is only the start of the discussion”, she concludes, “stay tuned…”.
Around the IPKat’s Cousins Blogs
Reviewed by Tian Lu
on
Sunday, October 30, 2016
Rating:
Reviewed by Tian Lu
on
Sunday, October 30, 2016
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
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: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html