Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week!

The IPKat has survived the low temperatures of a stormy February and offers you a treat - the 184th edition of Never Too Late. Enjoy the latest and greatest of the IP world during the past week.

Trade Secrets

The AmeriKat Annsley reviews a UK IPO call for a technical consultation on the transposition of the EU Trade Secrets Directive into the UK law: BREAKING: UK IPO launches technical consultation on draft regulations transposing the EU Trade Secrets Directive.

Trade Marks

In Here we go again? Strong brands as a barrier to entry, this time from "The Economist", Kat Neil casts a critical eye on the “back to the future” view expressed by The Economist, which suggested treating trade marks in anti-competitive terms as a potential barrier to entry.

Further, AmeriKat Annsley summarises the key issues of a UK IPO consultation on the implementation of the Trade Mark Directive 2015, which may help to shape the UK’s trade mark system on the post-Brexit international stage: UK IPO publishes consultation on implementing Trade Mark Directive 2015 into UK law.

Trolling goes international

The AmeriKat Annsley reflects on an increasing patent troll problem in Europe according to a new study by Darts-IP at the European Parliament: Has Europe turned into the Eastern District of Texas? New study shows NPE activity has risen 19% year-on-year.

In Top 10 issues from submissions before UK Supreme Court in Warner-Lambert v Actavis second medical use battle, Kat Eleonora watches the drama unfold in the UK Supreme Court between Warner-Lambert and Actavis/Mylan.

The European Patent Office is looking to appoint new legally qualified members of the Boards of Appeal in Munich, see EPO looking for new legally qualified members of the Boards of Appeal for more details.

GuestKat Frantzeska Papadopolou investigates what the buyer of a patented product can do with the product in question under the doctrine of exhaustion in the light of a recent decision by the German Federal Court of Justice in Trommeleinheit: Repair or reconstruction: Where do you draw the line for exhaustion under patent law?

Registered Designs

In L'Oreal v RN Ventures - The Registered Design Perspective, GuestKat Rosie Burbidge invites to look at a seminal patent case through a registered design lens.

Gaming and Law

In “More than Just a Game: Music, video games, GDPR & technical protective measures” (Report 2 and Report 3),  AmeriKat Annsley reports on key legal trends in, and issues facing, the gaming and interactive entertainment industries as they were discussed at More than Just a Game conference organized by Queen Mary University of London.

Data Protection

GuestKat Mirko Brüß takes the IPKat readers  to Germany, where the Federal Court of Justice has considered an online rating of medical doctors, see German FCJ: doctors can have their profile deleted from rating site - but can they?


Never Too Late 183 [week ending 18 February] Mr Justice Carr's L'Oreal v RN Ventures decision bristles with warnings on Actavis v Lilly claim interpretation, equivalents and prosecution history (Parts I and II) | Can Wenzhou and cigarette lighters tell us something about why there are IP rights? | Surveying the scene - passing off & surveys | Copying the counterfeits | 2017 Canadian trademark cases: progressive and regressive | Linking under US copyright law: green light to its inclusion in the scope of public display right comes from New York | Isgrò and Waters, problem erased | Stockholm Administrative Court orders ISP to provide customers’ details to Swedish police | (No) privacy by default? German court finds Facebook in breach of data protection law | More than Just a Game (Report 1): eSports | Blockchain my IP | Strategies for Combating Counterfeiting and Piracy (The USA and The EU Perspectives) | AIPPI UK Upcoming Event: Professor Bently to debate how far the "zone of exclusivity" of registered IP rights goes

Never Too Late 182 [week ending 11 February]  BREAKING: in his new Opinion in Louboutin AG Szpunar (confirms and) advises CJEU to rule that a trade mark combining colour and shape may be refused or declared invalid |  The new AG Opinion in Louboutin: is it really bad news for the famous red sole? | Yet another horse – The Polo/Lauren Company L.P. v Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd. | When passing off is enough to successfully oppose a trade mark |  BREAKING: Sky's the limit for CJEU references in Sky v SkyKick trade mark battle |  Influencers and undisclosed sponsored activities: where do we stand? |  Brand Finance 500 … What’s the value of music IP? |  The Céline affair: what moral rights can and can’t do…even in France |  Can Nativity scene characters attract copyright protection under Italian law? | Blackcurrant, public interest and the first ever compulsory licensing application at the Community Plant Variety Office? |  Costs of intermediary injunctions: Sir Richard Arnold's review of a recent publication | Alternative ways for financing and incentivizing research: a Nobel laureate and his colleagues state their case |  Event Report: IP inclusive - Inappropriate Behaviour

Never Too Late 181 [week ending 4 February] Book review: ‘Copyright and Information Privacy: Conflicting Rights in Balance’ | A legislative initiative that merits attention: Mandatory mediation in Greece in trademark, patent and industrial designs infringement disputes | Austria refers Facebook ‘Hate-Speech’ case to the CJEU | Protection of traditional knowledge and cultural expressions: the case of 'Maasai IP' | A spectrum of specificity - Article 3(a) of SPC Regulation | Can ‘public morals’ prevent the use of religious symbols and motifs in advertising? No, says the European Court of Human Rights | BMG v Cox - when does an ISP lose its safe harbour protection? | Embrace my beloved frog, as a guardian.

Never Too Late 180 [week ending 28 January] EPO revokes CRISPR patent – a clear cut case of invalid priority?|Blocking injunctions and their costs: some details of the forthcoming Supreme Court round of Cartier | When does copyright protection arise in works of applied art and industrial models and designs? A new CJEU reference | Trial sequence in SEP litigation - time for a rejig? | Bad faith confirmed for ALEXANDER trade mark application? | Is a circular logo for coffee confusingly similar to the Starbucks’ one? Yes, says the General Court | Fine-tuning the SPC Regulation; a never-ending story?

Image credits: Malingering
Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week! Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Ieva Giedrimaite on Thursday, March 01, 2018 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.