Never too late: If you missed the IPKat last week!

Been too busy hibernating working to keep up with IPKat this week? No problem! Here is the 127th edition of Never Too Late to bring you up to speed!

InternKat Tian brings us up to speed on the Opinions of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the State Council on improving the property rights protection (PRP) system and lawfully protecting property rights (中共中央、国务院关于完善产权保护制度依法保护产权的意见released a on the 27th November.

Neil reports from the the international conference jointly organised by the Centre for International Intellectual Property Studies (CEIPI) and the European Audiovisual Observatory in the beautiful European city of Strasbourg held on the 22nd November.
All you need is love Kat friends!

Following the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in GS Media [Kat-coverage here] there have been applications of this ruling at the level of Swedish [hereand German [here and herecourts. Returning to Sweden, Katfriend Pär Öhman (Bildombudsmannen AB) explains in detail what happened in the Swedish proceedings.

The IPOS (the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore) sends a seasonal patent e-card produced by the Patent Analytics team at IPOS International!

UK unregistered design right (UK UDR) protects the shape or configuration of the whole or part of a product for ten years from the date the design was first (or 15 years from the date it was first recorded in a design document if that period is shorter).  Rosie brings us a recent IPEC case, Action Storage v G-Force Europe [2016] EWHC 3151 (IPEC) (07 December 2016) which considered what UK UDR resided in some plastic storage lockers (if any).

Guest post from long time Katfriend Prashant Reddy on the litigation between academic publishing houses OUP and CUP against Delhi University and a photocopy shop when a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court ruled against them in an appeal on December 9, 2016.

Katfriend Sascha Abrar (Löffel Abrar IP lawyers) reports on the German court application of the principles that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) set in its landmark GS Media.
Monday Miscellaneous with bonus posts from Kat friends Federica Pezza and Milena Kichashka and Around the IP Blogs brings you all the IP happenings floating around the blogosphere.


Never Too Late 126 [week ending on Sunday 11 December] Wild Boys Sometimes Lose It: Duran Duran fail to reclaim their US copyright I AIPPI Rapid Response Report: Debating Lyrica's recurring pain on plausibility, abuse and infringement I Will UK industry suffer from Government's "ratify now, repent at leisure" UPC stance? I BREAKING: Unanimous Supreme Court in Samsung v Apple finds that damages may be based on a component, not whole product I Will Iceland's EU trade mark end up on ice? I Indian Trade Marks Registry to widen its doors for recording “well known” marks I Mediaplayers and streaming: AG Campos Sánchez-Bordona in Filmspeler proposes broad interpretation of notion of 'indispensable intervention' I PPDs and standard disclosure - can you have your cake and eat it? I Obviousness over the CGK - dead or alive? I (Belatedly) remembering Raymond Niro, the most influential person in patent litigation whom you may have never heard of I Genuine use of three dimensional EU trade marks - heated arguments over ovens I Never Too Late I Around the IP Blogs

Never Too Late 125 [week ending on Sunday 4 December] | "tronc"--the most bizarre rebranding of 2016? | Next week - UK Supreme Court hears the Brexit case | The proposed new VAT rules on e-publications: do they have any implications for copyright and digital exhaustion? | Negative decision for anti-HIV therapy patent: Merck Sharpe & Dohme v Shionogi Co Limited | Book review: Copyright and E-Learning | Friday Fantasies | Fontem see their patent “vaporised” – the dangers of added matter | BREAKING: Antidote found for poisonous priorities | Around the IP blogs | AIPPI Congress Report 5: Antitrust and Pharma - seeking a balance | When the Rolling Stones visited 2120 South Michigan Avenue in Chicago | No measure of success in passing off cup case | BREAKING NEWS: UK signals green light to Unified Patent Court Agreement | Book Review: Copyright Beyond Law | Mr Justice Carr's decision in Victoria Plumb is about Adwords (honest) 

Never Too Late 124 [week ending on Sunday 27 November] | Sunday Surprises | EU law forbids the resale of non-original tangible copies of computer programmes | EQE roundup | Technology law on the menu in Madrid | IP Summit 2016 | Announcing JIPLP Conference on the Present and Future of EU and UK Copyright | East meets West: the EU-China IP Forum Part 1 and Part 2 | Around the IP Blogs | Rocket in the Patents Court: Napp Pharmaceutical v Dr Reddy's and Sandoz

Never Too Late 123 [week ending on Sunday 20 November] | Time for a Haar-cut - please do not relocate the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office | Remember the House Ban? How two years flies past | Gilead triumphant as Court of Appeal upholds Arnold J in Idenix's Sovaldi appeal | BREAKING: CJEU follows AG and holds French law on out-of-print books contrary to EU law | Again on the first post-GS Media national decision | Top 5 things IP lawyers must remember about English contract law | Monday Miscellany | Around the IP Blogs
Never too late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Never too late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Hayleigh Bosher on Thursday, December 22, 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.