What’s going on around
the IP blogosphere of late:
It's time for Africa! |
USA: Fox Television Stations,
Inc. v. AereoKiller, LLC, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No.
15-56420, 21 March 2017
Kluwer
Copyright Blog updates on the ruling that reversed the decision of the U.S.
Court of Appeals in San Francisco which found FilmOn X, LLC, to be a “cable
system” that was eligible for compulsory licenses under the Copyright Act. The
court held that a service that captures copyrighted works broadcast over the
air, and then retransmits them to paying subscribers over the Internet without
the consent of the copyright holders, is not a “cable system” eligible for a
compulsory license.
.Africa Arrives Today - Own The Continent
Afro-IP announces the sunrise period of .Africa in which trademark owners can secure domain names matching their registered trademarks before the new dotAfrica generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) is launched to the public on the 4th July 2017.
Preparing for the
Unified/Unitary Patent
SOLO IP keeps us in the loop on all
things related to the "European Patent with Unitary Effect" otherwise
known as a Unitary Patent (UP) such as several upcoming events ( e.g. CIPA
webinars and AIPPI
panel debate), their main concerns and where to go to keep up to date on
the process ( BristowsUPC and the official Unified Patent
Court site).
UB3: Uber's New Patent Purchase
Program
Talking of patents, on IP
Finance, Uber has launched a patent purchase program called, UB3. Uber’s press
release explains the benefits of the program: “Sellers will submit patent
family details and a price they are willing to accept directly into our
submission portal. By eliminating price negotiations and providing quick
reviews, UP3 will reduce the total transaction time compared to a typical
patent transaction.”
Riding on the coat-tails of
Pandora – what is acceptable in Denmark?
Kluwer
Trade Mark blog informs us of a recent case before the Maritime and
Commercial High Court in which jewellery chain Pandora sued a former business
partner, Mr Nielsen, and his company for unlawful use of the trademark PANDORA.
The court found in favour of Pandora, stating that Nielsen and his company had taking
unfair advantage of their reputation and continuously infringed their trade
mark. The court therefore ordered compensation and damages for a grand total of DKK
50,000 (Euro 6,700)…
CopyKat
Over on the 1709 blog is the latest copykat update
which includes an insight to the potential mismanagement of the US Copyright
Office, the use of the “Soft Kitty” song in TV show The Big Bang Theory, and
Collecting Societies working together to create a new system using blockchain technology.
Glass half-empty for
Jagermeister
CLASS 99 (Designs) discusses
the recent Case
T-16/16 Mast-Jägermeister v EUIPO (beakers), in which
Jagermeister’s design containing a picture of a beaker, with a bottle also
present, was rejected as the bottles and beakers fell into different classes. After
some seemingly unsuccessful back-and-forth, the Examiner withheld a filing date
until the satisfactory representations were filed. Jagermeister argued that there
should only be an issue where the design cannot be clearly seen in the
representations as filed, not when you can clearly see one or more but can't
tell precisely which is claimed. However, the court disagreed, stating that the
design must be of a quality permitting all the details of the matter for which
protection is sought to be clearly distinguished.
Photo credit: Steven Tan
Around the IP blogs
Reviewed by Hayleigh Bosher
on
Friday, April 14, 2017
Rating:
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