Around the IP blogs!

JIPLP is the weblog of the Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice. Here's where editorial panellists, readers and contributors can come together and share their view on all aspects of IP law and practice. And here are the Author’s Takes of August 2017:

The Author's Take. 📷✍️📚
by Yin Harn Lee
Lecturer in Law, University of Sheffield

by Luxmi (“Lux”) Rajanayagam
Queen Mary, University of London

by Mario Pozzi
Roedl&Partner Law Firm, Milan – Italy

In this post, Lasse Søndergaard Christensen and Louise Thorning Ahle analyze the possibilities of enforcement with regard to products protected as neither a registered nor an unregistered Community design on the Danish market.

In the recent decision W.F. Gözze Frottierweberei Gmbh, Wolfgang Gözze GmbH v Verein Bremer Baumwollbörse, case C-689/15, the European Court of Justice analyzes an issue which the EUTMR rules do not clearly resolve, i.e. whether or not a licensed EUTM registration may be invalidated if the owner fails to carry out quality controls on licensee/licensees’ products.

In Close Thais with Madrid, as from November, MARQUES reproduces the official WIPO notice regarding the accession by the Kingdom of Thailand to the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks.

Photo courtesy of Mr. He Gong and his lovely kitten Ruobai.
Around the IP blogs! Around the IP blogs! Reviewed by Tian Lu on Thursday, August 24, 2017 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. RE: by Luxmi (“Lux”) Rajanayagam
    Queen Mary, University of London: Louboutin v Van Haren - AG Szpunar’s position on Louboutin’s red sole mark: a shoo-in for a shape mark

    It looks like wheel inventing.

    This subject has been already studied by Dutch lawyers much in depth.


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:

Powered by Blogger.