Don't let the sun go down on me... |
Too busy soaking up the sun (which kindly decided to show up) to keep up
with the latest IPKat news? No problem! Here is the 151st edition of
Never Too Late!
Guest Kat Stephen reports on an event
at UCL organised by the Institute of Brand and
Innovation Law (IBIL). The theme was how composers in the time of Mozart made
use of each other's material at a time before copyright law, compared with the
modern position.
Tian
reports on the 5th bi-annual TILTing Perspectives
conference held at Tilburg University in the Netherlands. This, the first of
two posts, focused on the healthcare sessions at the conference, including topics
such as robot doctors and algorithm therapists; robotic cognitive therapeutic
researchers and the law; and, expert systems and medical malpractice: reframing the
notion of negligence.
This is the second of two posts on the TILTing Perspectives conference
which reported on the panel discussions on new IP perspectives; the collective
management of copyright; and, copyright law making in the EU. As well as the
key note speech from Professor John M. Golden.
New Kat friend, Robyn Trigg (A&O) reports on HHJ Hacon’s judgment in
Curt G. Joa, Inc. v Fameccanica Data SpA [2017] EWHC 1251 (IPEC), particularly
considering the new trend to include added matter in the pleading point of
patent cases.
Mathilde
lets us know about the recent filing of a copyright infringement claim by internet chef Elizabeth LaBau (known as SugarHero) against Television
Food Network, relating to LaBau's cooking video of her flagship recipe “Snow
Globe Cupcakes”.
AmeriKat looks at the newly
anointed FRAND injunction from the recent case of Unwired Planet v Huawei FRAND. Following Huawei’s failure to comply with the terms of the worldwide licence (at
the time of the final judgment), a separate hearing was held at which the
injunction was granted. This is contrary to the normal position under English
law that once final relief is granted, parties are not entitled to come back to
court. However, in recognising the special nature of a FRAND undertaking, the
FRAND injunction is more flexible to allow parties to come back to court at the
expiry of the licence.
In a reference for a preliminary ruling, the French Council of State
asked the CJEU to clarify the compatibility of the 2012 French law on the
digital exploitation of out-of-print 20th century books with the InfoSoc
Directive. The CJEU stated that the system of the
InfoSoc Directive is one of broad and preventative rights. Although national
initiatives on out-of-commerce works are not against the directive per se, the
Court clarified that nonetheless authors, not collecting societies that do not
have any direct mandate from them, must consent to third-party uses of their
works.
In the case of Chugai Pharmaceutical v UCB [2017] EWHC
1216 (Pat) the Japanese pharmaceutical company
Chugai applied for a declaration that it did not have to continue paying
royalties to UCB under a patent licence. The licence was originally for a
portfolio of patents relating to an antibody known as
tocilizumab of which all but one (the 771 Patent) had expired. Some of its
tocilizumab products are manufactured and sold in the USA, so Chugai argued
that those products fall outside the scope of the claims of the 771 Patent,
meaning that it would no longer have to pay for them.
Elena Varese at DLA Piper in Milan, Italy dispels some notions about
Italian court delays, the joys of being an expert in various fields and wine
tasting with Advocate General Cruz Villalón.
AIPPI/AIPLA event on 15 June 2017 at Bird & Bird for a discussion on
copyright law in the digital age with a particular focus on exhaustion of
rights and the development of digital marketplaces for pre-owned digital
copies.
PREVIOUSLY ON NEVER TOO LATE
Never Too Late 150 [week ending on Sunday 4 June] BREAKING: German court makes two (very important) copyright references
to the CJEU I Implausibly incredible or just plain insufficient? I Marks
misleading the public on the paternity of copyright works are
fraudulent - say French Supreme Court I Should the court be indifferent to
consumer indifference regarding the mark? I ‘Display At Your Own Risk’: A Tour
into ‘Copyright Surrogacy’ I To UPC or not to UPC? That is the question...
(Part 1) I Book Review: Patents for Technology Transfer I Event Report: Combat
the Copycats
Never Too Late 149 [week ending on Sunday 28 May] IPSoc
Event Report: The ever-evolving law on the "communication to the
public" right
| Nestlé loses yet another KitKat
battle | Judge sounds alarm of
weakened US patent system, while industry groups start amending Section
101 | BREAKING: Supreme Court
limits US patentee's forum shopping capabilities | Shinder, Shinder, Shinder … will you ever be like
Tinder? | US Supreme Court uses
TC Heartland to blunt key troll tool, but will California welcome the next wave
of troll litigation? | Is there
copyright in the taste of a cheese? Sensory copyright finally makes its way to
CJEU | Big Data, products &
processes: being a German patentee in the era of the Rezeptortyrosinkinase
decisions | Life as an IP
Lawyer: Singapore | Appointed
Person issues first appeal decision in a design case | The meaning of "red carpet" in
two and three dimensions: from Ancient Greece to Cannes | Judge Alsup driving forward Uber-Waymo
trade secret dispute amongst "red flag" disclosure hearings | Monday Miscellany | Friday Fantasies.
Never Too Late 148 [week ending on Sunday 21 May] Book
Review: Russell-Clarke and Howe on Industrial Designs I Scope of review by the
General Court of decisions by the EUIPO Board of Appeal: the last act in
LAGUIOLE I Dining out on trade marks - ZUMA - the own name defence for pets and
groundless threats I The popular China copyright monitoring website 101 I Where
are the women? Supreme Court hosts London launch of ChIPs with call to action
to advance women in tech, law and policy I Br*x*t and brands – out of the EU in
680 days I In memoriam: Adolph Kiefer, Olympic gold medalist, innovator and
inventor extraordinaire I Digital copies, exhaustion, and blockchains: lack of
legal clarity to be offset by technological advancement and evolving
consumption patterns? I German TV show allowed to call right wing politician
'Nazi sl*t', Hamburg court rules I Latest leak reveals that review of EU IP
enforcement framework is currently in a deadlock I Sunday Surprises, Around the
IP Blogs
Never Too Late 147 [week ending on Sunday 7 May] Deterrence sentencing for copyright infringement: Court of Appeal gives guidance I AIPPI Event Report: Will the Unwired Planet v Huawei FRAND judgment lead to fewer NPEs? I Unjustified Threats Bill receives royal assent I"Socialistic brand": a unique category of vintage brand I Movement afoot in the patent scene in Argentina I‘Right to be forgotten’ may potentially apply to all top-level domains, says Swedish Data Protection Authority I A General Civil Restraint Order against issuing further IP claims - Is this the end of the Perry v Brundle saga? I Monday Miscellany, Wednesday Whimsies
Never Too Late 147 [week ending on Sunday 7 May] Deterrence sentencing for copyright infringement: Court of Appeal gives guidance I AIPPI Event Report: Will the Unwired Planet v Huawei FRAND judgment lead to fewer NPEs? I Unjustified Threats Bill receives royal assent I"Socialistic brand": a unique category of vintage brand I Movement afoot in the patent scene in Argentina I‘Right to be forgotten’ may potentially apply to all top-level domains, says Swedish Data Protection Authority I A General Civil Restraint Order against issuing further IP claims - Is this the end of the Perry v Brundle saga? I Monday Miscellany, Wednesday Whimsies
Photo credit: Emily Schreck
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Reviewed by Hayleigh Bosher
on
Monday, June 19, 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