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 138th edition of Never Too Late.
On 2 March, the AmeriKat, as a keen prowler of the Daily Cause list, warms up for the following day’s court decision in the first trial between Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics Co., Ltd and Others v AbbVie Biotechnology Limited by summarising the latest timeline events.
Following AmeriKat’s notice, Eibhlin Vardy timely analysed the High Court’s decision on 3 March that granted declarations to Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics and Samsung Bioepsis and Biogen Idec to the effect that their products lacked novelty or an inventive step at a particular date. The post focuses on the issue of the court's jurisdiction and appetite for granting such declarations.
 |
| How is Kit Kat being treated there... in Singapore? |
The Singapore Court of Appeal in Societe Des Produits Nestlé SA and anor v Petra Foods Limited and anor [2016] SGCA 64 recently affirmed a previous High Court decision that Nestlé’s two-finger and four-finger shape marks (the “Shape Marks”) are not registrable. This decision comes after the English Courts had similarly refused the registration of the same Shape Marks in the United Kingdom. Neil Wilkof invites Kat Friends, Lau Kok Keng and Nicholas Lauw, partners, and Leow Jiamin, associate, of Rajah & Tann Singapore, to kindly share their thoughts on this decision.
What room does EU copyright leave for national initiatives in areas harmonised by relevant EU directives? See Eleonora Rosati’s fresh review on the CJEU judgment in ITV Broadcasting v TVCatchup, C-275/15 (TV Catchup 2) – a reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal of England and Wales.
Ever-productive Kat Eibhlin Vardy also analyses the recent High Court decision of Champagne Louis Roederer v J Garcia Carrion SA & Others [2017] EWHC 289 (Ch) which “has a number of quirks in its factual matrix”. The dispute related to a claim for infringement of Roederer's UK and EUTMs for the word CRISTAL.
Darren Smyth highlights two exciting events coming up in March.
IPKat Darren goes to places – this time he is going to the MIP International Patent Forum 2017, taking place on 8 & 9 March at the Waldorf Hilton Hotel in London, which hopefully some IPKat readers also attended. The detailed brochure can be downloaded via here.
Eleonora Rosati brings “More Than Just a Game” to readers, the said “only international academic-led conference on Interactive Entertainment and Intellectual Property Law” to readers attention. The main theme of the 2017 edition conference, which will take place at Stationer's Hall in London on 6 and 7 April, is Virtual and Augmented Reality. Further information can be found here.
Hola! The International Trademark Association (INTA) is heading to Barcelona, Spain in May for its 139th Annual Meeting. From Saturday, 20 May to Wednesday, 24 May, over 9,500 global intellectual property professionals from 190 countries will convene for five days of meetings and events.
For Kat readers who agonize whether prolixity or brevity is the better approach to drafting court appeals, IP practitioners in Spain have now been given their marching orders. Neil Wilkof, from his wide network in the IP community, this time invites Kat friend Colm Ahern of Elzaburu in Madrid to summarise what the Spanish Supreme Court has decided—long appeal briefs are out (but footnotes are finally in).
Photo courtesy of Laoshu huahua.
PREVIOUSLY ON NEVER TOO LATE
Never Too Late 137 [week ending on Sunday 26 February] | Patents and the Silicon Valley of clothespins | Interested in EU copyright and wish to discuss it in Florence? Here's the event for you | ARGOS - trade marks, domains, and google advertising | Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal orders block of The Pirate Bay and Swefilmer | The Enforcement Directive permits punitive damages - or does it? | Trader keeps the [good] faith in a spare part in trademark doublebill| Book Review: The Informal Economy in Developing Nations - Hidden Edge of Innovation? | Copyright law in the UAE: it's not what you might think | Monday Miscellany | Major changes to trademark law in Turkey: read all about it |
Never Too Late 136 [week ending on Sunday 19 February] | Tartan Army scores own goal? | Book review: "Brandfather: John Murphy, The Man Who Invented Branding" | IP Summit 2016 (Second Part) | Around the IP Blogs! | Monday miscellany
Never Too Late 135 [week ending on Sunday 12 February] Playing Polo with potential defendants | KYLIE trade mark battle spinning around | When the IP community reaches out to the broader public: the story of IDIA in India | Too big to pay? Employee-inventor compensation in the Court of Appeal | Willow Tea Rooms: A tale of tea and trade marks (Part 2) | BREAKING: AG Szpunar advises CJEU to rule that The Pirate Bay makes acts of communication to the public | No more counterfeiters! Chanel, Apple, Bayer, LVMH (and more) write to President Juncker on revision to IP Enforcement Directive | Is German SEP litigation set to increase with the "confidentiality club decision" of the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf? | Trying to find balance? Come to UCL IBIL's copyright panel on Wednesday | After Sweden and Germany, GS Media finds its application in the Czech Republic
Never Too Late 134 [week ending on Sunday 5 February] | Around the IP Blogs | King Tut's tomb: conservation or replication (but don't forget the "aura")? | The next round of Cartier: UK Supreme Court will hear appeal re costs of intermediary injunctions | New National IP Strategic Action Plan in China | Full decision of Enlarged Board of Appeal in partial priority / poisonous divisionals referral (G01/15) published | INGRES Conference Part II - Trade Secret, Copyright, Design and Trade Mark Law Developments | 5 mistakes to avoid in IP student essays ... and not only there | INGRES Conference Part I - European Patent Law Developments | Remembering Masaya Nakamura, the "Father of Pac-Man" | Monday Miscellany
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Reviewed by Tian Lu
on
Monday, March 13, 2017
Rating:
Reviewed by Tian Lu
on
Monday, March 13, 2017
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
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: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html