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

The 201st edition of Never Too Late is here to bring you up to speed on the latest and greatest of the IPKat world! Today’s highlights include no-deal Brexit analysis, event reports, copyright in fireworks, logos and even football trophies! And for Kat’s sake – what is ‘Fiverrization’?!

IPR Melting Pot

The UK Government has issued a number of technical notices relating to IPR’s in a no-Brexit scenario. In UK copyright in a no-deal Brexit scenario: what will happen?, Kat Eleonora Rosati reviews Copyright if there’s no Brexit deal. GuestKat Rosie Burbidge sheds light onto the exhaustion of rights (No deal Brexit - what does it mean for exhaustion of rights?), patents (No deal Brexit - what will happen to patents - particularly SPCs and the UPC?), and registered Community designs and trade marks (No deal Brexit - what does it mean for registered Community designs and trade marks).

GuestKat Mathilde Pavis provides her insights about a new phenomenon/business model-- ‘Fiverrization’ and what effect it might have on the creative industries: Will there be a “Fiverrization” of the creative industries?

Kat Neil Wilkof provides a summary of the First Plenary Session (“Anchoring Innovation: The Future of IP Organisations”) of the 2018 edition of Singapore’s IPWeek @ SG: IP Offices still searching for (the holy grail) of innovation and incentives: the view from IPWeek @ SG

Cancun Kats


Kat friend Constance Leong describes a fast-track patent scheme launched by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore to accelerate innovation for finance sector inventions: How Singapore Is Fast-Tracking FinTech Patent Applications (and making more "Crazy Rich Asians"?)


Guest contributor Akshat Agrawal analyses copyright protection in fireworks displays. In particular, he considers the notion against a backdrop of material expression, fixation and dramatic works, and raises questions of unity, certainty, enforceability and public policy. Evolving concepts of work and sustainability of copyright: the curious case of curated fireworks displays.

GuestKat Nedim Malovic discusses a recent refusal by the US Copyright Office Review Board  to register Vodafone’s Speechmark logo on the ground that it is not sufficiently original: US Copyright Office Review Board denies registration of ‘Vodafone Speechmark’.

GuestKat Frantzeska Papadopolou reports on a recent ruling issued by Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal. The decision considers the protection of copyright-protected works when these are used as evidence as part of a court proceeding: Using copyright-protected material as evidence in a court proceeding.

The Paris Tribunal has considered a case brought by the French Consumers’ Association against Twitter and declared ‘null and void’ most of the Twitter’s T&C clauses, including the copyright licensing provisions for user-generated content. GuestKat Mathilde Pavis has more: Paris tribunal guts Twitter’s T&Cs… including the copyright clause for user-generated content

Image Credits: Güldem Üstün and new-york-city


Never Too Late 200 [Week ending 16 Sep] | BREAKING: FCJ refers case regarding YouTube’s liability for damages to the CJEU | Fashion, algorithms, and copyright: is it all about what we want or rather what we didn't know we want? | Time for a break - catching up with KitKat | Book review: The Economics of Open Access – on the Future of Academic Publishing |

Never Too Late 199 [Week ending 9 Sep] What does a no deal Brexit mean for trade marks and designs? | Copyright and tattoos: where are we now? | Swedish Supreme Court to rule on damages relating to online copyright | CJEU back in ‘Hot Water’ – when are infringing goods being ‘offered’? | A bagel is a bagel is a bagel, and a pita is a pita is a pita: but is a bialy a cebularz?

Never Too Late 198 BREAKING: CJEU rules that Louboutin red sole mark does NOT fall within absolute ground for refusal | The Broad's CRISPR patent: The curious case of the missing declaration | Kymouse's stay of execution | The AmeriKat's Top 3 upcoming IP summer events | BREAKING: UK Supreme Court rules that ISPs do NOT have to pay implementation costs in Cartier case | who should control the 1500-year old monastery manuscript of the Garima Gospels? | Mexican GIs and the registry of foreign GIs and AOs | Around the IP Blogs!

Never Too Late 197 [Week ending 10 June] The IPKat is turning 15 ... and is inviting you to the birthday party! | Prison labor: a boon to greater patenting? | DeepMind: First major AI patent filings revealed | An Apology to the Machine | Report: EPO conference - Patenting Artificial Intelligence | Respect of family life cannot be abused to trump copyright protection, says AG Szpunar | Dutch court rules that for-profit provision of links to unlicensed content is an infringement | CJEU confirms differential treatment of what amounts to unfair advantage for well-known trade marks in its KENZO Guest Post: NDAs & NNNs in China.ESTATE/KENZO judgment | Tails of a Cybersquat Claiming Grumpy Cat and an IP Licence | Never Too Late

Never Too Late 196 [week ending 3 June] European Commission proposes Regulation to limit SPC protection with "export manufacturing waiver" | Paparazzi & copyright: where are we and where should we be? | When Norway's oil giant Statoil announced a rebranding, it was not "horsing" around | Report on IPO’s 2018 European Practice Committee Conference (2/2) | Yes Virginia, there is IP practice outside of London: a special interview | Conceptualizing Copyright Exceptions in China and South Africa | Contentious Trade Mark Registry Proceedings | Friday Fantasies | Around the IP Blogs!

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 Tuesday, October 09, 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.