The 193rd edition of Never Too Late is out!
The
18th World IP Day: A good day in China for J’adore Dior as the 3D mark territorial extention for the golden perfume, originally denied, has been overturned by the Chinese Supreme Court. Other than territoriality and the review procedure flaws, the other main dispute concerned the trademark acquired distinctiveness.
Book Reviews
This book, written by Orly Lobel, describes the
behind the scenes action of the dispute between Mattel and MGA Entertainment, i.e.,
Barbie v Bratz. It covers the moment of the creation of the Bratz dolls (the
investigation on which was a central point of the trial) to the parties' relationship
with judges and jurors. IP might be the background of this book and not the
central piece, but it provides the stage to an essential part of the “copyright industries”:
merchandising.
Copyright
The
18th World IP Day: A good day in China for J’adore Dior as the 3D mark territorial extention for the golden perfume, originally denied, has been overturned by the Chinese Supreme Court. Other than territoriality and the review procedure flaws, the other main dispute concerned the trademark acquired distinctiveness.
Patents
European
Pharma Law Academy returns to beautiful Cambridge from 3+1 days (10 – 13
September; the first day, devoted to fundamentals, being separately bookable).
In order to avoid disappointment, book soon!
Data Protection
Swedish
court holds that Google can be only ordered to undertake limited delisting in
right to be forgotten cases: GuestKat Nedim reports on this court case and also discusses its possible implications in light of the current CJEU jurisdprudence and possible impacts.
Book Reviews
SpecialKat Verónica and GuestKat Mathilde have plunged
their paws into some IP literature.
The five part book analyses the topic of Patent
Pledges from different perspectives (overview; enforcement; competition law; impact
on innovation and the future of patent pledges). The book, co-edited by Jorge
L. Contreras and Meredith Jacob, is a must read for those IP practitioners and
scholars involved in technology development and standardisation.
IP Enforcement
When it comes to IP enforcement, Chinese IP maths: 3 + 15 = more than 18? Katfriend Michael Lin gives his view on the current state of IP enforcement in China, following the six fold increase in number of IP specialised courts and a general more positive attitude.
PREVIOUSLY ON NEVER TOO LATE
Never
Too Late 192 [week ending 29 April]
Celebrating female inventors on World IP Day | Event
report: Women, Coding & The Future | AG Campos Sánchez-Bordona denies
communication to the public in ‘Cordoba’ case | BREAKING: 9th Circuit rules
that Naruto has no standing under US Copyright Act | BREAKING: 9th Circuit
rules that Naruto has no standing under US Copyright Act | BREAKING NEWS: UK ratifies UPC Agreement | BREAKING:
"Specifically, precisely and individually identifiable", AG Wathelet
adds to the Article 3(a) SPC Regulation wrangle | A telecoms blockbuster: Beijing High Court
upholds patent injunction in IWNCOMM v Sony | No likelihood of confusion
between ‘Bobo Cornet’ and ‘Ozmo Cornet’, says the General Court | The
Wundversorgung decision - proportionality and injunctive relief in Germany | China
to adopt punitive damages for IP infringement – An economic commentary | When
fashion sought to protect itself through private collective action: recalling
the Fashion Originators Guild
Never Too Late 191 [week ending 22 April] Fearless Girl will be moved due to
... viability concerns | Fordham 2018 Report 1: Building Out the House - Music
Licensing | Premaitha's strike out gamble fails before Carr J in new Illumnia
patent battle | Poor reception for jurisdiction challenge to global FRAND
licence relief | Boards bite back but need real teeth - Guest Contribution |
What makes a family? Bridgestone opposition two tyred, fell flat | Public
interest in Plant Variety Rights. How high is the bar for the grant of a
compulsory license? | IT Law Summer School returns to beautiful Cambridge |
BREAKING: German FCJ declares AdBlock Plus legal | Book review: Droit d’auteur
4.0 / Copyright 4.0 | From IP practitioner to murder mystery author: Roz
Watkins and "The Devil's Dice" (a pity about that patent attorney in
the opening scene) | Weekly Roundup:
Around the IP Blogs!
Never Too Late 190 [week ending 15 April] Swedish
Patents and Market Court of Appeal says that an ISP may not be required to hand
over information about subscribers’ IP addresses | The EU copyright
reform and the legacy of CJEU case law: lip service? | Rich writer, poor writer
| Regeneron v Kymab - Part II: Interpretation and Infringement | Facebook
and music rights: the “not-so-heard-not-GDPR-related-news”. Will it be the new
music global service? | Are viewers of on-line contents entitled to the truth?
“Excellences & Perfections” and the saga of Amalia Ulman | What is the
final destination of autonomous vehicles? | More than just a game - IP and
interactive entertainment | The Danish Act on Trade Secrets has now been
adopted | From IP practioner to murder mystery author: Roz Watkins and
"The Devil's Dice" (a pity about that patent attorney in the opening
scene) | Weekly Roundups: Monday Miscellany; Around the IP Blogs!; Friday Fantasies
and Sunday Surprises
Never Too Late 189 [week ending 1 April] It
is the year 2050, and the last trademark litigator has retired | RETROMARK: A
year of trade marks - Part 1: Costs after Cartier | Right of publicity not a
right to control one's own image by censoring disagreeable portrayals, says
appeals court in de Havilland case | EU Commission publishes paper on
consequences of Brexit on copyright | Brexit 'cliff-edges' - Alliance for
Intellectual Property paper | Del Toro and The Shape of a Lawsuit | Copyright,
exceptions and cultural institutions: Australia is listening! | Google cannot
hide behind its algorithms, German court finds | Does the InfoSoc Directive envisage
digital exhaustion? Questions in the Tom Kabinet CJEU reference finalized (at
last) | Court of Appeal, following EPO, reverses Carr J in Regeneron v Kymab
dispute | Regeneron v Kymab - Part I: Sufficiency | How do you protect patents
from judicial and expert hindsight? | Weekly Roundups: Monday Miscellany
Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week!
Reviewed by Cecilia Sbrolli
on
Sunday, May 20, 2018
Rating:
Reviewed by Cecilia Sbrolli
on
Sunday, May 20, 2018
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] Thou shalt not discriminate the Lego block over any other kind of product – GRUR speaks out on C-211/24](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWJYQUJNvYydrZcjwSHPuxd14xX3_48aBusHKBogY-Wg1BPSJSABbFFjmGiUV3aqG2npP9xYaIl1vtWK5AsqGOQPgRD2TWFLhyyc4xGm1fHDD-tt9kHcrSSgAyju2P9wSKz0VW6h7D5MD4Hxd9vREyxKYzlMRNXxxtxc3DiNsXppfVaxgSxAMV/s72-c/21742619125_7c9e53cd39_o.png)
![[Guest post] Comparison of wine and gin: the EUIPO’s unquestionable Similarity Tool](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNfTEBXiPVS0XjZi4mNE1OtXLxXiEp1PUgcUK7MMMXlfyTkO5SMXv-VCMXXNdS_F1XdMMxYca1VbBTGvvDeTVpo5x-5YwR7atQJmK3x32T8LACpf4308kht3nEtaxPwEPcGGrB0s5xjGktmQPOiVwPVLRO5JbW19qupc7xUtiVutvaWHow0OpBkA/s72-c/Picture%201.jpg)
![[Guest post] Muddying the waters of copyright – a rapid reaction to today’s IPEC decision which sees the sinking of the WaterRower’s claims for copyright protection](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7chFANC7ppmZl4_nlR6_hZEcg6cOhVEJNVXqki4p82BoVlcLFotuOXzHWYD5lKLiiK_kRoWeXmJjjaV2DpoKsAWq8U3LFioO5W_841a9gcfDIFjvZWcGqfnr0jWJNtyXptIYR_8bxCssaDkJ9KMokuSqy1g65Il7p2hPwo4MfRCEGoUPQJesvbg/s72-w400-c-h189/Screenshot%202024-11-11%20at%2018.20.45.png)
Posts
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