Around the IP Blogs!

Exploring IP cyberspace!
This kitten is delighted to bring you the highlights from some recently published IP blogs!

Marie-Andree Weiss of The 1709 Blog reports on Pena v. Celebrities Unlimited, Inc., 1:17-cv-01853-PGG. The case involved the unauthorized reproduction and sale of framed copies of a photograph taken during a Texas Rangers baseball game.

Michael Geist blogs about the digitization of books and fair dealing in Canada within the context of Concordia University case, which involved the unauthorized scanning and uploading of poetry books for five students. 

CREATe announces that the resource page of the first Copyright Education Symposium, held in 2016, is now online. The event was sponsored by CREATe, ALCS, CLA, ERA, PRS for Music, and the Industry Trust for IP Awareness and was supported by UKIPO. The commissioned working paper prepared by InternKat Hayleigh Bosher can be reviewed here.

Moving to trademarks, Friso Onderdelinden discusses on the Kluwer Trademark Blog three cases brought before Dutch courts, which involve the unauthorized use of trademarks in clothing (as a decorative artwork) and pet accessories.

Finally, over at The TTABlog, John L. Welch analyzes Christian Lacroix v. Christian Lacroix, Snc, in which the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (USPTO) dismissed an opposition based on fraud, which had alleged a lack of consent for the trademark registration.

Around the IP Blogs! Around the IP Blogs! Reviewed by Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo on Monday, March 20, 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.