Around the IP Blogs!

This Kitten is delighted to bring you the highlights from some recently published IP blogs!

Ben Challis reports on The 1709 Blog about Drake’s victory in the lawsuit filed by the Estate of James Oscar Smith, case 1:14-cv-02703-WHP. The case involved the inclusion in Drake’s song “Pound Cake/Paris Morton Music 2 part of the “Jimmy Smith Rap” lyric, which was then modified so as to convey something different (jazz versus “real music”). The Court found such inclusion was fair use and, as a consequence, the defendants were not liable for copyright infringement.

Transformative use in an old-fashioned way!

Moving to trademarks, MARQUES CLASS 46 reports on the amendments to the Rules 12, 25, 26, 27 and 32 of the Common Regulations under the Madrid Agreement and Protocol and item 7.4 of the Schedule of Fees. The amendments will enter into force on 1 July 2017 and provides, inter alia, that WIPO may issue an irregularity notice when examining international application regarding a limitation of goods or services, which should be remedied within three months, otherwise such limitation shall be deemed not contained in the application.

Staying with trademarks, John Welch discusses on The TTABlog the case of In re PharmaCann LLC, Serials Nos. 86520135 and 86520138, in which the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board refused to register PHARMACANN and PHARMACANNIS for “retail store services featuring medical marijuana” and “dispensing of pharmaceuticals featuring medical marijuana” in classes 35 and 44, on the ground of lack of “bona fide intention to make lawful use of the marks”.

Turning to Appellations of Origin (AO), Patricia Covarrubia blogs on IP Tango about the announcement of the cancellation of the authorization to use the AO “Pisco” for those Peruvian producers who participate in the contest “Spirits Selection by Concours Mondial de Bruxelles”, which will take place in Chile this year. The announcement was made by INDECOPI (the Peruvian National Institute for the Defence of Competition and Protection of Intellectual Property), in the context of the changes to the participation rules, which provides that Peruvian producers will be allowed to participate if the products are named “Peruvian Grape Distillate” instead of “Pisco”.

Last, but not least, regarding patents, David Pearce muses on Tufty the Cat whether an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system could be considered as an inventor, in the context of a recent article published in the Digital BusinessLaw.

Image by Andy Miccone.