Around the IP Blogs!

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!


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.


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.


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! Around the IP Blogs! Reviewed by Ieva Giedrimaite on Thursday, July 05, 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.