Happy July Kat-followers! If you have been busy enjoying the first days of sweet summer, no worries at all, the 153rd edition of Never Too Late is here to bring you your weekly dose of IP news!
The
week started with a boom with Kat Eleonora reporting that US
Supreme Court holds provision preventing registration of disparaging
trade marks unconstitutional. The Court allowed the rock band
“The Slants” to register their name as a trade mark, explaining
that trade marks are private speech, not the government's. Preventing
the granting of applications would thus result in hindering free speech.
How
can the labelling of our 5-a-day be made more enticing? Kat Neil
explores the research on differentiated labelling for vegetables and
their appeal to a young public translated into a trade mark
perspective in: Wolfing
down those veggies: it's a matter of the right descriptive term.
When
you are curious about a fact, do you “Google it”? According to
some, this would amount to trade mark “genericide” but as InternKat Cecilia tells us, A
googol of generic questions in Ninth Circuit's Elliott v Google
decision were raised in this subject, ultimately deciding that
the Google trade mark is still alive and well.
Life as a Kat: gotta love those summer afternoon naps |
In
the seventh episode of the Life
as an IP lawyer series, the AmeriKat brought us to Sydney,
Australia to meet Wen Wu of Gilbert + Tobin. Mr. Wu describes his
routine, his hopes and dreams for the future and his passion for AI
Law.
Following
on the previous week news, Kat Mark reported on an interview of Prof.
Dr. Siegfried Broß. The Former
Constitutional Court judge weighs in on UPC ratification suspension
and gives his opinion on the role of EPO Boards of Appeal and on the
timing of the proceedings.
In
view of a fashion choice for last Friday's night out, there were news
on the famous Louboutin red sole shoes. In fact, AG
Szpunar advises CJEU to rule that a red sole may not be just a
colour but maybe also a shape which would fall under the
prohibition of the trade marks directive. Kat Eleonora comments on
the possible outcomes of the decision.
If
instead of a night out dancing you are more of a heraldry kind of
person, well with the news on Trump
and his coat of arms you were in for a treat. Yes, Trump owns a
coat of arms, and yes, in the UK they are not too happy about it. Guest Kat Rosie reports.
And
last, riding on to the weekend, Guest Kat Rosie also told us that BMW
wins appeal over use of trade mark to promote spare parts business.
The Court of Appeal applied a test, making a clear distinction
between informative use and commercial use for spare parts.
Weekly
Roundups: Around
the IP Blogs, Saturday
Sundries
Image credits: Cecilia Sbrolli
PREVIOUSLY
ON NEVER TOO LATE
Never
Too Late 152
[week
ending Sunday 18 June] German
Constitutional Court stops implementing legislation for Unitary
Patent Package
| Conference report: Innovation and Competition in Life Sciences Law
- Part I | Conference report: Innovation and Competition in Life
Sciences - Law Part II | Special
K and beyond: tennis brands | CJEU says that site like The Pirate Bay
makes acts of communication to the public | The challenge of big
data: we ignore it at our professional peril | German court orders
Google to stop linking to Lumen Database | Event report: Trends in
the creative digital economy | A Tale of Stability - Business Models
in the Creative Industries | Paris Tribunal supports heir's claim to
looted painting | Kiss singer seeks trade mark registration for hand
gesture | Tuesday Wonders | Sunday Surprises
Never
Too Late 151
[week
ending on Sunday 11 June] Mozart
and Other Pirates | TILTing
Perspectives 2017 report (1): The healthcare session
| TILTing
Perspectives 2017 report (2): The IP session and the Key Note
| Application
to amend nappy patent not so watertight - IPEC holds nappy patent
invalid for added matter and lack of clarity
| SugarHero
and the Snow Globe Cupcakes - Copyright and Food Videos
| Mr
Justice Birss introduces the brand new FRAND Injunction in Unwired
Planet v Huawei
| French
Counseil d'État invalidates decrees implementing law on
out-of-commerce works
| A
Tight Squeeze: Matters of Comity and Justiciability
| Life
as an IP Lawyer: Milan
| AIPPI/AIPLA
Event: Copyright in a digital age - US and UK perspectives
Never
Too Late 150 [week
ending on Sunday 4 June] BREAKING:
German court makes two (very important) copyright references to the
CJEU | Implausibly incredible or just plain insufficient? | Marks
misleading the public on the paternity of copyright works are
fraudulent - say French Supreme Court | Should the court be
indifferent to consumer indifference regarding the mark? | ‘Display
At Your Own Risk’: A Tour into ‘Copyright Surrogacy’ | To UPC
or not to UPC? That is the question... (Part 1) | Book Review:
Patents for Technology Transfer | 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: If you missed the IPKat Last Week!
Reviewed by Cecilia Sbrolli
on
Monday, July 03, 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