A lot has happened on the IPKat last week! If you missed out on some of the news, no problem, the 177th edition of Never Too Late is out.
A little bit of FRAND to
inaugurate 2018! Kat friend Richard Vary reports from the shores of California on
the judgement TCL v Ericsson in Supersize this! Unwired Planet American style in TCLv Ericsson.
Nomen est omen (an apt
name, so to say) for Toyota, as their car Prius (Latin for “before” or “first”)
was not so prius in applying for a
trade mark in India, which led to a dispute with local Prius Auto Industries
Ltd. Kat friends Ashutosh Kumar and Taapsi Johri took their views on different
aspects of this case in, respectively, Supreme Court of India in Prius trade mark battle
declare that evidence of reputation spillover must be explosive and Has the Indian Supreme Court Moved the Bad Faith
Analysis to the Back Seat?
AIPPI Event Report: Unjustified threats - are you
threatening me? During the
event, the changes brought by the Intellectual Property Unjustified Threats Act
2017 were discussed, as covered by Kat friend George Khouri.
Last week there were a few changes
in the IPKat’s cat bed, new Kats coming, some leaving and others taking up new
challenges. All the intel on: The IPKat team: arrivals, farewells, and news.
Why are you arguing, I am Bucharest's football star! |
How many stars can Bucharest football have? Kat friend Florica Rus reports from the sidelines of the match on "Stars" on the football field; less so in the Trademark Office?
The stroke of midnight on January
1st did not only bring celebrations and cheers in Germany but also
the entry into force of the so called “network enforcement law”, or, for the
braver ones out there, the Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz. Guest Kat Mirko reports
on the news in German ‘hate-speech’ law tries to regulate Facebook
and others - will it work?
Brussels court in FN Herstal v Heckler & Koch wrestles with combination invention v mere aggregation of features. It was not wrestling per se but more of a duel at dawn, as the decision revolves around patents for weapons, or the lack thereof. Contributing from Brussels, Kat friend Philippe Campolini.
Brexit: requests to Govt from IP professional bodies such as mutual recognition of judgements and continuation of EU-derived rights. Guest Kat Eibhlin made a summary of the note for us.
Street heart: urban murals as common goods, is it achievable? Kat friends Giovanni Maria Riccio and Federica Pezza take us through the streets of all cities embellished and made more colourful by mural art installations and through the pain of the artists whose work is difficult to protect.
If the portability of online content is close to your heart, then Have your say on the UK implementation of the EUPortability Regulation: public consultation now open! You have until 31 January 2018. Guest Kat Mathilde reports.
PREVIOUSLY
ON NEVER TOO LATE
Never
Too Late 176 [week ending 31 December] Can the Buddhist notion of Bodhi be
appropriated as a trademark? | Book Review: Intellectual Property in Australia
| This Kat will be a JudgeKat and bids farewell | Congratulations to Sean
Dennehey! | AIPPI Event Report: Are you sitting
comfortably....? Patent Roundup 2017
Never Too Late 175 [week ending
24 December] Linking for profit,
technical means and burden of proof - German BGH applies CJEU case law to
Google’s Image Search | Release by IP Australia of draft of legislation for
partial implementation of Federal Government's response to Productivity
Commission final report | Rainier days ahead for Starbucks as it loses trade
mark opposition in Singapore | Females and felines in intellectual property law
| CJEU rules that ice cream sold as ‘Champagner Sorbet’ can be branded as
‘Champagne’ | A Kat's 2017 Copyright Awards
Never Too Late 174 [week ending 17 December] The first
modern blockbuster IP merchandising campaign? Disney, Davy Crockett and the
coonskin cap I UPC - update from UK on statutory instruments I The ILO rules
reinstatement of Board of Appeal member, but EPO resists I INTA calling: The
2018 Ladas Memorial Award competition for paper on a trademark subject I R
0003/15: surprising interpretation of feature violates right to be heard I
Germany: Bundespatentgericht annuls Nespresso capsule shape mark I Wind in the
sails for atypical trade marks in the EU - graphical representation following
the recent EUTM reforms I Coty, distribution agreements and luxury brands I
Around the IP Blogs! I Monday Miscellany
Never Too Late 173 [Week ending Sunday 10 December] Why is it
so difficult to the make the case against counterfeiting (or does it just seem
so)? | The Red Bull colours: no trade mark registration for indeterminate
colour combination | Limoges porcelain now protected by French GI scheme |
BREAKING NEWS - CJEU holds that preserving luxury image of products in selective
distribution agreements is not contrary to competition law | AIPPI Congress
Report 15: Partial Designs: Full Protection? | AIPPI Congress Report 16:
Patentability of Computer-Implemented Inventions | INTA Brand Authenticity
Conference (Report 4): Brands, social media and CSR | Commissioned research
opportunity - exhaustion of rights | BREAKING: CJEU holds that SPCs cannot be
obtained on the basis of an "end of procedure notice" pursuant to
Article 3(b) SPC Regulation | You snooze (for 40 years) you lose – HABITAT mark
(un)enforced in bad faith | Role of CJEU post-Brexit to be considered by House
of Lords inquiry
Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week!
Reviewed by Cecilia Sbrolli
on
Wednesday, January 10, 2018
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