Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!

This kitten is delighted to bring you the 125th edition of Never Too Late!
Busy week? Luckily is Friday!!!

"tronc"--the most bizarre rebranding of 2016?
Neil Wilkof ruminates the most bizarre rebranding strategy: from Tribune Publishing Company into “tronc”. A very amusing post you shouldn’t miss!

Darren Smyth reports the historic hearing which took place from 5 to 8 December regarding who has the power to take the decision for leaving the EU under the UK constitutional framework.

Eleonora Rosati discusses the VAT Directive comprising the equal treatment for both printed and electronic publications and its implications on digital exhaustion matters.

Guest Kat Eibhlin Vardy recaps Merck Sharp and Dohme Limited v Shionongi & Co Limited, [2016] EWHC 2989 (Pat), involving the alleged infringement of Shionogi’s European Patent, entitled “Antiviral agent” by MSD as well as a claim of invalidity.

Andrew Grey reviews the book "Copyright and E-Learning" by Jane Secker and Chris Morrison book. He gives the book a thumbs up for educational institutions. Read why.

InternKat Tian Lu summarizes the week’s news including the funded PhD positions being offered by the Center of Law & Economics at ETH Zurich.

Gareth Holliday analyses Nicocigs v Fontem Holdings & Fontem Ventures, [2015] EWHC 2752 (Pat). The case involves a claim of invalidity of Fontem’s Patent EP2022349 related to an electronic cigarette as well as for a declaration of non-infringement and a counterclaim for infringement.

David Brophy blogs about the order in case G 1/15 of the Enlarged Board of Appeal at the EPO, which establishes that partial priority of a claim comprising alternative subject-matter may not be refused based on one or more generic expressions or otherwise (“generic OR-claim”) provided such subject-matter was disclosed in the priority document for the first time.

InternKat Hayleigh Bosher recaps the highlights of some IP blogs!

Daniel Lim reports on the competition panel of AIPPI Congress, which took place in Milan last September, which discussed the relationship between competition and patent law regarding topics such as “pay for delay”, non-cash value transfer and misuse of the patent system.

In the context of the “World’s Greatest Rock & Roll Band” new blues album (eagerly awaited by this kitten!), Neil Wilkof recalls the relationship between the Rolling Stones and Chess Records, in whose studios the “2120 South Michigan Avenue” composition was recorded in 1964.

Rosie Burbidge analyses George East Housewares Ltd v Fackelmann GmbH & Co KG & Probus Creative Housewares Ltd, [2016] EWHC 2476 (IPEC). The passing off case involves the adoption by the defendants of a similar get-up to that used in connection with conical kitchen measuring cups.

Darren Smyth reports on the surprising confirmation made by the UK government regarding the willingness to proceed with preparations to ratify the Unified Patent Court Agreement.

Nicola Searle reviews Marta Iljadica book, "Copyright Beyond Law". Copyright scholars, sociologists and lawyers will find useful the interdisciplinary analysis of graffiti, from a legal, historical and sociological points of view.

Jeremy Blum and Andrew Butcher discuss Victoria Plum Limited v Victorian Plumbing Ltd, [2016] EWHC 2911 (Ch), involving trademark infringement, honest concurrent use defense and passing off in the context of Pay per Click (PPC) bidding on keywords.


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 122 [week ending on Sunday 13 November] | Is depositing better than sequencing? | European Commission on Biotech Directive: tomatoes about to be squashed? | The U.S. presidential election of 1876: votes, cannabis and intellectual property| CJEU upholds duty to reverse-engineer trade marks in Rubik's cube decision, but what about the actual v abstract test? | BREAKING: CJEU says that EU law allows e-lending| Around the Web Blogs| IP Publishers and Editors' Lunch 2016! | Firings will continue until morale improves - Merpel revisits the EPO

Never Too Late 121 [week ending on Sunday 6 November] | Sunday Surprises | Firings will continue until morale improves - Merpel revisits the EPO | Will too much of one and not enough of the other spell bad news for innovation? | BREAKING NEWS Brexit - High Court rules Government cannot Invoke Article 50 under Crown Prerogative | Canada's new approach to diagnostic practices prompts division at CIPO
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo on Friday, December 09, 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.