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

Wake me up when it's spring!
Too busy powering through the January blues to keep up with IPKat? No problem! It’s February, you made it and here is the 133rd edition of Never Too Late.

Veronica reports on the 11th edition of the Pan-European Intellectual Property Summit, which took place on 1st and 2nd December at the World Customs Organization in Brussels.

Neil considers the implications of well-known quotes that transcended their specific context and become part of a broader verbal heritage. However the quotes are often not identical to what was originally said in due to the process of transmission and public adoption.

The trademark licensing question that won't go away: the standing of a licensee to sue
Kat friend Taapsi Johri of K&S Partners, Gurgaon, India, shared this report of an Indian court decision  that found that jurisdiction of a court in a suit for infringement cannot be claimed based on the place of business of a “permitted user” of the trademark in question.

Guest post from Steven Baldwin (Allen & Overy), summarizing 2017's recent patent decisions. 

An overview of the UK Group of AIPPI annual session of reviewing the year's patent cases. Andrew Lykiardopoulos QC summarised a year’s worth of patent cases in a 90 minute presentation. 

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in OTK v SFP, C-367/15 answered no to the question of whether the Enforcement Directive (Directive 2004/28) prevent Member States from providing in their legislations the possibility to award punitive damages in IP cases? 

The UK Supreme Court ruled by an 8 : 3 majority that the Government cannot initiate the process for the UK leaving the EU (the notification under Article 50 of the TEU) by itself using the Royal Prerogative, but instead an Act of Parliament is needed. 

Neil reviews Copyright in Jewish Law by Rabbi Nachum Menashe Weisfish’s (Feldheim, Jerusalem and New York, 2010)

Following a referral from the Czech Supreme Court in New Wave CZ v Alltoys (Case C-427/15) the CJEU explained that you do not need to start IP infringement proceedings in order to get information about an infringer under Article 8(1) IP Enforcement Directive.

Tian looks at the most recent decision by the Supreme People’s Court of China (SPC) on the “Michael Jordan” case from the perspective of linguistics.

Plus the weekly round ups Around the IP Blogs and Sunday Surprises


Never Too Late 132 [week ending on Sunday 22 January] |When this Kat doesn't know, he reaches out to Kat readers: what really happened at the dawn of modern commercial trademark use? I Social media, "WikiLeaks" and false news in the 18th century: Thomas Jefferson and the "Mazzei letter" I Does the economic impact of SPCs necessitate SPC Regulation reform? The European Commission wants to find out I A look at the proposal for the ePrivacy Regulation I BGH: to cease means to recall I Never too Late x2 I Around the IP Blogs

Never Too Late 131 [week ending on Sunday 15 January] | Arrow declarations can be granted: Fujifilm v AbbVie | Guest Post - China's Patent Boom | Watch out lawyers - do you own your name? 

Never Too Late 130 [week ending on Sunday 8 January] | Around the IP Blogs | Sunday Surprises | Trademark and co-branding as a badge of … did you say "location"(?) | 15 fully-funded IP PhD positions are calling for candidates | Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! | Around the IP Blogs | Biosimilars battle in clearing the way - Fujifilm v AbbVie continues | Book review: Maintenance time and the industry development of patents

Never Too Late 129 [week ending on Sunday 1 January] | Happy Public Domain Day! | Jaguar Land Rover DEFEND[ER]s its trade mark | Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! | Passing off the National Guild of Removers and Storers | Fuss over function: In case you missed the annual IP-World Christmas party | The Supreme People's Court of China's Michael Jordan Trademark Decision | Intermediary IP injunctions: what are the EU implications of the UK experience? | Länsförsäkringar, Länsförsäkringar, bork, bork, bork!| The champagne of trade mark disputes | Around the IP Blogs! | Swedish Supreme Court has ruled that sport broadcasts are not protected by copyright | Swedish Patent and Registration Office refuses registration of figurative mark because contrary to morality and public order
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 Monday, February 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.