IPKat is not wasting any time on the beach this summer
preferring to embark on a journey around other IP blogs. Enjoy a weekly
roundup: a seminal SPCs decision from Switzerland, an MEP interview about the
Proposal for a Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market, a
discussion on a Danish standard of morality and more!
Patents
IP
Finance reflects on a recent decision in AatrixSoftware,
Inc. v. Green Shades Software, Inc., whereby the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a
rehearing en banc concerning two cases that may make it more difficult to
dismiss a claim challenged for lack of patent eligible subject matter under the
Alice/Mayo test because of factual issues.
Patently-O has published a guest post
by Timothy Holbrook, a Professor
of Law at Emory University School of Law, about the implications of a US
Supreme Court’s decision in WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., which
addressed the issue of patent infringement damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284.
Kluwer
Patent Blog reports on a recent decision handed by the
Court of Appeal of Barcelona, revoking a controversial 2017 decision by the
Patents Court of Barcelona that held that “Swiss-type” claims were affected by
the Reservation made by Spain when it ratified the European Patent Convention. The
Patents Court had ruled that European patents, insofar as they confer
protection on chemical or pharmaceutical products “as such“, shall be
ineffective in Spain.
The Swiss Federal
Supreme Court issued a landmark decision concerning the requirements for
Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) for combination products. Until
recently, Switzerland defended the so-called infringement test for SPCs for
combination products. The Federal Supreme Court has now ruled that while the
infringement test shall still apply to existing SPCs, new SPCs for combination
products shall be examined in light of the Medeva ruling and other decisions of
the CJEU concerning combination products. Visit EPLAW
for the full analysis.
Anti-Counterfeiting
JIPLP posts an editorial from the
July issue of Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, which
focuses on the free-trade zones from an IP perspective. The article reviews two
EU IPO/OECD reports on this subject matter: a 2017 report
on Mapping the
Real Routes of Trade in Fake Goods and a 2018
study on Trade in Counterfeit Goods and Free-Trade Zones: Evidence
from Recent Trends.
Copyright
Contemplating the future of copyright in the Digital Single Market |
Kluwer Copyright Blog publishes an interview with Julia
Reda MEP about the Proposal for a Directive on copyright in the Digital Single
Market. Ms Reda criticises the proposed press publishers’ right (Article 11) for
being a “link tax”; she discusses the main problems and potential negative
consequences of adopting Article 11 and proposes compromise. Ms Reda further
extends her criticism towards a proposed Article 13, whereby active platforms
have to conclude licensing agreements with the rightholders under fair and
reasonable terms, but at the same time there is a ban on automated upload
filters as an enforcement tool, due to their gross inaccuracy and negative
impact on fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression and the right to
science and culture.
Trade Marks
Kluwer
Trademark Blog addresses an application of Article 7(1)(f) EUTMR (for
ease of reference: ‘trade marks which are contrary to public policy or to accepted
principles of morality’) in Denmark. It necessarily entails balancing the right of
traders to freely employ words and images in the signs they wish to register as
trademarks against the right of the public not to be confronted with
disturbing, abusive, insulting and even threatening trademarks. The Danish
standard of morality is a determining factor why very few applications are
rejected under the Danish equivalent of Article 7(1)(f) EUTMR.
Image Credits: Native
Remedies
Around the IP Blogs!
Reviewed by Ieva Giedrimaite
on
Thursday, July 05, 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