IPKat keeps you up to date
with more news and views from around the IP blogosphere!
Case law
Trademarks
Quick off the mark, the MARQUES trademark blog
reviews last week’s opinion
of the Advocate General on validity of the EUTM “Neuschwanstein”. The Advocate
General upheld the General Court’s decision that the State of Bavaria’s EUTM
“Neuschwanstein”, a German fairy tale castle and popular tourist attraction, is
not descriptive of the goods and services covered by the mark and not therefore not invalid.
MARQUES
also posts on the recent CJEU opinion, Red
Paralela and others v Orangina Schweppes, concerning the effect of the
exhaustion of rights rule of Article 7(1) Trademark Directive on the right of a
trademark owner to oppose the importation of goods affixed with the trademark,
when the trademark was placed on the goods by an assignee of the trademark in
another EEA member state. The CJEU held that the importation of goods bearing the
trademark could not be opposed, because the owner had promoted the trademark
as a single global trademark.
|
Exhausted his rights? |
Patents
The
Blog of European Patent Law reviews the recent decisions issued by the EPO
technical board of appeal (BoA). Highlights include T796/12,
in which the BoA considers the admissibility of an appeal filed by a company that was in fact dissolved
before the appeal was filed due to bankruptcy, and T1127/14,
in which reimbursement of the appeal fee is considered in view of a violation
of the right to be heard following modification of the description by the Opposition
Division without submission to the Patentee. Also look out for The
Blog of European Patent Law's invention of the week!
In the US, IPwatchdog provides an
overview of the current US case law concerning the obviousness and
anticipation for claims directed to an isolated component of a prior art
mixture. Examples of such claims include pharmaceutical products comprising a single enantiomer isolated from a known racemic
mixture. The takeaway messages include that for “an isolated component to potentially be vulnerable to an anticipation
attack, the anticipatory reference needs to specifically identify and
characterize the component, and must teach how to isolate the component”.
Patentylo
reports on a reminder
from the US Federal Circuit that an inventor who signs an employment agreement
providing that an inventor “will assign” rights to inventions, doesn’t mean that
she does, in fact, assign them. The issue in this appeal case was whether a co-inventor
of a patent transferred her co-ownership interests in the patent under the
terms of an employment agreement.
Designs
The MARQUES designs
blog analyses the recent Acacia
designs cases, in which the CJEU considered the scope of the so-called
repair clause (Article 110(1)) of the Community
Design Regulation (CDR). The repair clause excludes Community Design protection
for designs constituting a component part of a complex product for the purpose
of the repair of that complex product. In a decision termed “revolutionary” by MARQUES’s
Fabio Angelini, the CJEU ruled that the scope of the repair
clause is not limited to component parts of a complex product necessary to the
appearance of the protected design, but applies to any component parts of the complex
product.
News and opinion
Brazilian patent prosecution can be a bit of a waiting game (discussed by IPKat back in 2015, and IPTango last year). IP watchdog now reports that, to deal with the backlog, the Brazilian Government is considering the emergency measure of automatically granting (without examination) more than 200,000 patent applications.
|
Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial (INPI), Brazil
|
IPDebate’s
Ashley Cohen considers the effect of the WIPO’s Beijing Treaty on
Audiovisual Performances. The Beijing Treaty extends the minimum standards
of moral rights provided under the Berne Convention to audiovisual performers. Cohen also considers the difference in the
protection of moral rights in US, France and UK.
Finally, feeling in the need for an overview of the current
state of copyright law? The 1709 Blog’s CopyKat, provides!
Actually, I believe that the Brazilian IP Office HQ is in RIO:
ReplyDeletehttps://goo.gl/xYcMBe (link to Google's street view)