Been
away and want to catch up with last week's IP news? No problem! As always, the
IPKat is here to bring you a quick summary, here’s the 163rd edition
of Never Too Late.
Quenching my thirst for the latest IP info! |
Neil considers that one way to view
the discussion set out by Sanford Grossman and Oliver Hart in their 1986 article, "The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration" is to ask: when should one contract with a supplier
for a good or service and when should one vertically integrate it by acquisition? He considers how, in addressing this questions, they treat
IP matters quite differently.
It
has been confirmed that the complainant who filed the constitutional complaint
against the ratification of the UPC Agreement in Germany was the attorney Ingve Stjerna.
Stjerna has long been a vocal critic of the Unified Patent Court, and the
complaint reflects some of his earlier
criticisms.
The
European Commission has set out its principles for the political dialogue on
intellectual property (and various other issues including the use of data) in
the Brexit negotiations.
Katfriend
Darren
Meale provides an analysis of a recent decision
relating to UK unregistered design rights (UKUDR): Neptune v
DeVOL Kitchens [2017] EWHC 2172. In particular, he notes that as
well as giving a clear illustration of a UKUDR in action, the case also firmly
answers an important question about the scope of UKUDR following the amendment of
the law in 2014.
Advocate
General (AG) Szpunar has provided his Opinion in
relation to VCAST
Limited v R.T.I. SpA, C-265/16, a the reference for a
preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) from
the Turin Court of First Instance. The AG affirmed that EU law prohibits a commercial undertaking
from providing private individuals with cloud computing services for the remote
video recording of private copies of works protected by copyright.
Katfriend
Darren
Meale follows up on Kat Rosie’s announcement that
the European Commission had set out its principles for the political dialogue
on intellectual property in the Brexit negotiations. He explains the
EU Commissions position and how that measures up against the UK’s position.
Neil
reports on the 6th Annual Singapore IP Week event organised by the
Intellectual Property Office of Singapore, IP Academy, IPOS-International and
IP ValueLab. With 3,000 participants taking part in various programs, the
highlight event was the two-day Global Forum on Intellectual Property: Ideas to
Assets.
On
September 19th and 20th, the National University of Singapore will host the
Design Law Reform Conference at its Bukit Timah Campus, the conference will
discuss the current state of play of design protection at national and
international levels.
PREVIOUSLY
ON NEVER TOO LATE
Never Too Late 162 [week ending Sunday 27 August] Book
Review: Economics of the Internet I France: "Photoshop decree" coming
up soon I Is there a role for the tort of unlawful means in patent law? I Around
the IP blogs!
Never Too Late 161 [week
ending Sunday 20 August] Italian
Supreme Court issues groundbreaking decision on punitive damages, opening the
door for IP claims | TILTing Perspectives 2017 | Freedom of panorama in
Portugal: content and scope of the exception | When "mayo" is not
mayonnaise, yet still is mayonnaise: All a matter of the label? | Friday Fantasies
Never Too Late 160 [week
ending Sunday 13 August] Scottish
court “vaporized” trade mark invalidity appeal | Battle of the free trade mark
databases – Global Brand Database versus TMview | An Improved Improver? - Part
3. | Netflix weather report: sunny today, possibility of rain clouds tomorrow?
| Roger in troubled Waters
Never Too Late 159 [week
ending Sunday 6 August] Cross-undertaking in damages -
Napp Pharmaceuticals v Sandoz Limited | In memoriam of June Foray: the greatest
screen voice whom you probably never heard of, but likely heard | UK Supreme
Court holds that grey market sales can be criminal offence | New administrative
notice-and-takedown procedure in Greece | Are you XKING kidding me? Making
sense of trade mark conflict in the EUTM system | The challenge of protecting a
database without a sui generis right, this time from Singapore | France: costs
of blocking injunctions to be borne by internet intermediaries | INTA Trademark
Administrators and Practitioners Meeting--early bird registration ends August
4th | TILTing Perspectives 2017 (First Part: Online Enforcement and Black Box
Tinkering) | France: 13 million in damages awarded for linking to downloadable
copyright works | Monday Miscellany, Sunday Surprises
Photo credit: wabisabi2015
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat Last Week!
Reviewed by Hayleigh Bosher
on
Tuesday, September 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