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

Been away and want to catch up on last week's IP news? No problem! As always, the IPKat is here to bring you a quick summary -- the 129th edition of Never Too Late.

Looking forward to
a bright and prosperous 2017!
At the end of last year (though it was only 2 weeks ago…), intelligent IPKat Eleonora Rosati brings us a fine year-end summary of the notable highlights in the world of copyright; plus, the “top 2 important issues” that are worthiest of attention in 2017. 

From 1 January 2017, many copyright works have entered into the public domain. Guest Kat Rosie Burbidge sketches 6 creators and their masterpieces and celebrates their contributions to the human society. 

Rosie Burbidge opens a seasonal bottle of fizz -- this time around the question of consent to use a trade mark. Enjoy this Kat’s toast with her reviews on the relevant notable cases. 

Rosie Burbidge discusses the trade mark conflict between Jaguar and Bombardier -- yes the one about the “very well-known, if not indeed iconic” DEFENDER vehicle. 

IPKat Mark Schweizer brings a (rare) case of “acte clair” -- a trade mark battle of “the most Swedish name against the most Swedish activity”.

Ever-productive Rosie Burbidge writes the story of those "pretending to be in the club" --several third parties passing themselves off as being members of The National Guild of Removers and Storers after their membership had ceased, and the extent to which the defendants should be liable for advertisements on third party websites. 

Kat Friend Matthew James Elsmore hosts a fictional office party in the IP-World where we all work, and induces Trademark Law and TrademarkTroop to talk about themselves (yes as if they are alive) with readers (it's hard to describe my feeling after hearing "trade mark law’s speeches"). By doing this, he hopes to “spark a temporarily reflective mood of what is important and a look ahead in bright mood to how the future might pan out."

Former GuestKat Mike Mireles and Kat friend Henry Liao dicuss the fresh court decision (from the Supreme People’s Court of China) on the Michael Jordan trade mark/name-personality case. “The importance of this decision is hard to understate”, they conclude, “It sends a clear message that intellectual property rights will be enforced in China—even with substantial reliance interests by a Chinese company.”

What has been the most significant IP development in the UK this year? From a practical perspective, IPKat Eleonora Rosati answers the question by referring to the judgment of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in Cartier, which confirmed that owners of IP rights other than copyright can seek injunctions against intermediaries to block access to website where counterfeits are available.

Readers may remember that IPKat reported the C More case (see here and here) in 2015. But what happened to C More once the case got back to the Swedish Supreme Court? Katfriend Pär Öhman (Bildombudsmannen AB) explains the content of last year's decision.

Is a figurative sign representing a hand with a raised middle finger contrary to morality and public order? This is the question that the Swedish Patent and Registration Office had to address in an interesting application concerning a sign of this kind. Katfriend Nedim Malovic (Sandart & Partners) explains how things went -- it seems in trade mark law parodies do not really have a place, at least in Europe.

* Last but not least, the weekly routines: Never too Late and Around the IP Blogs by InternKat Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo: Round-up for the latest IP happenings including events, book release and highlighted blog posts. 

Photo courtesy of Ms. Nyske Blokhuis.


Never Too Late 128 [week ending on Sunday 25 December] | Sunday Surprises | A TITANIC trade mark dispute | Book Review: two new methodology books for EQE candidates: Smart in C and Tactics for D| Around the IP Blogs| Around the IP Blogs | Before there was copyright there was censorship: the tale of "The Feast in the House of Levi” by Veronese | Permission to appeal in patent cases - farewell to the Pozzoli approach | Permission to appeal in patent cases - farewell to the Pozzoli approach | EPO bows to EU Commission on patentability of products of essentially biological processes | Monday Miscellany | Groundless threats - Nvidia v Hardware Labs | 

Never Too Late 127 [week ending on Sunday 18 December] | Around the IP Blogs | Top-level Property Rights Protection Guideline released in China | CEIPI/EAO Conference--"Copyright Enforcement in the Online World" | More on the Swedish application of GS Media | Mini UPC Update: UK signs Protocol on Privileges & Immunities | When a holiday e-card meets IP: Well done, IPOS! | Unregistered designs for eXreme storage | Academic publishing houses lose appeal against Delhi University & photocopy shop | GS Media finds its first application in Germany | Monday Miscellaneous | Part 36 offers in the IP Enterprise Court

Never Too Late 126 [week ending on Sunday 11 December] | Will Iceland's EU trade mark end up on ice? I Obviousness over the CGK - dead or alive? I Will UK industry suffer from Government's "ratify now, repent at leisure" UPC stance? | Indian Trade Marks Registry to widen its doors for recording “well known” marks | Mediaplayers and streaming: AG Campos Sánchez-Bordona in Filmspeler proposes broad interpretation of notion of 'indispensable intervention' | AIPPI Rapid Response Report: Debating Lyrica's recurring pain on plausibility, abuse and infringement | PPDs and standard disclosure - can you have your cake and eat it? | BREAKING: Unanimous Supreme Court in Samsung v Apple finds that damages may be based on a component, not whole product | (Belatedly) remembering Raymond Niro, the most influential person in patent litigation whom you may have never heard of | Genuine use of three dimensional EU trade marks - heated arguments over ovens | Wild Boys Sometimes Lose It: Duran Duran fail to reclaim their US copyright |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: If you missed the IPKat last week! Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Tian Lu on Friday, January 06, 2017 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.