Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat Last Week!

Whether it has been a busy week at work or a glorious week on holidays that has kept you from the latest news, not a problem. The 157th edition of Never Too Late is out to update you on the IP latest! 

The IPKat in his favourite holiday retreat
Kicking right in the week, court report from the UK: Sky v SkyKick - no CJEU reference re removal of own name defence to EUTMs ruled Birss J. Guest Kat Rosie reported on the reasoning behind the refusal to refer.  

Remember two weeks ago the IPKat reported on An improved improver? UK Supreme Court moves towards a UK Doctrine of Equivalents in Lilly pemetrexed battle? Well, Guest Kat Stephen brought us the second chapter of the Improver saga in: An improved Improver? Part 2.  

More philosophical questions on IPKat last week as Kat friend Anna Toh inquires on the issue: It may be use, but is it trade mark use? Our Singaporean friend reports on a case where the question was: can a trademark coined to identify the goods but alluding also to their characteristics still be considered use as trade mark to defend against a non-use revocation action? 

Onto practical philosophy, Kat Eleonora participated to The protection of TV formats: an Italian mock trial, organised by Mariangela Liuzzi and Elisabetta Minna, the latter writing a report for us. The verdict? Only one way to find out! 

Oyez! What can the possible implications of the CJEU Pirate Bay decision be? A new paper by Kat Eleonora, now in pre-edited version. To the download!  

On a discussion marrying aesthetics and intellectual property, In memoriam of Kenneth Jay Lane: "My designs are all original"; "original from someone" Kat Neil remembers the original but not so original jewel designer. 

French Commercial Tribunal : clarity in paternity is key. The Commercial Tribunal of Lyon sheds light on the right to paternity in a case involving…light design creations. Guest Kat Mathilde reports.

Image credits: Cecilia Sbrolli     

Never Too Late 156 [week ending Sunday 16 July] A film is a film is a film: at Cannes, is not that simple | BGH grants compulsory license in preliminary proceedings | An improved improver? UK Supreme Court moves towards a UK Doctrine of Equivalents in Lilly pemetrexed battle | The Smoking Gun – Is IP research the next tobacco scandal? | the special world of pesticide products, counterfeits and parallel imports | New CJEU reference…asking whether the InfoSoc Directive envisages digital exhaustion | Freedom of panorama in Italy: does it exist? | Can Crowdsourcing Solve the Orphan Works Problem? | the EU IPO Observatory study finds trade secrets rule the roost over patents in Europe | Mock (culinary) trial at INTA 2017| Weetabix in New Zealand Customs dispute over local rival Weet-Bix 

Never Too Late 155 [week ending Sunday 9 July] First application of the parody exception in Canadian law - long live Deckmyn!| "Big Box" not found generic or lacking distinctive character, but still .... | Changes to the Singapore copyright system: an update on the recent public consultations | he diplomatic crisis of Qatar and Gulf Cooperation Council's IP | Bundesgerichtshof's landmark ruling to hook extra-territorial patent infringement in Germany | BREAKING: Eli Lilly success as UK Supreme Court finds Actavis products directly and indirectly infringe pemetrexed patent | Monday Miscellany | Sunday Surprises 

Never Too Late 154 [week ending Sunday 2 July] I Book Review: Patent Drawing Rules I German Supreme Court holds that extra-territorial delivery can result in patent infringement I Canadian Supreme Court holds promise doctrine "unsound" in AstraZeneca v Apotex Nexium dispute I EU General Court finds bad faith in VENMO trade mark dispute I “Correction” of expiry dates for granted SPCs now finally possible in Italy...sometimes I Book Review: The Law of Trade Secret Litigation Under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act I Chanel victorious in California court battle against Amazon sellers of counterfeit goods I Simplifying Community Registered Design litigation in the UK - Spin Master v PMS I 77M v Ordnance Survey - access to justice for SMEs in IPEC I Canadian Supreme Court holds that Google can be ordered to de-index results globally I Life as an IP Lawyer: Copenhagen, Denmark I UK UPC ratification timetable to continue in September, while Prep Committee acknowledges German constitutional hold-up I Hendrix's portrait is original afterall say Paris Court of Appeal I Covfefe ... the trade mark?! I Injunction available after claimed licence fees paid - PPL v JJPB I Trademark application for the devil's horn withdrawn I Jo Johnson to continue as IP Minister I UPC Order on Privileges & Immunities placed before Parliament today I Celebrate 120 years of AIPPI in Sydney I Event invitation - The Pirate Bay communicates to the public: are there any more online infringement questions to be answered? I Re-using Amazon item numbers (ASINs) for similar goods can constitute trade mark infringement and passing off 

Never Too Late 153 [week ending Sunday 25 June] | US Supreme Court holds provision preventing registration of disparaging trade marks unconstitutional | Wolfing down those veggies: it's a matter of the right descriptive term | A googol of generic questions in Ninth Circuit's Elliott v Google decision | Life as an IP lawyer | Former Constitutional Court judge weighs in on UPC ratification suspension | AG Szpunar advises CJEU to rule that a red sole may not be just a colour | Trump and his coat of arms | BMW wins appeal over use of trade mark to promote spare parts business | Around the IP Blogs | Saturday Sundries

Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat Last Week! Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat Last Week! Reviewed by Cecilia Sbrolli on Tuesday, August 08, 2017 Rating: 5

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:

Powered by Blogger.