Too busy carving those jack-o'-lanterns? No
worries, if you missed last week’s IPKat highlights, the 203rd edition of Never Too Late is here to offer you
a summary, while the IPKat is off trick
or treating now. Happy Halloween Kat friends!
Kat Neil Wilkof considers the differences in connection with search costs and brand value between “branded” and “unbranded” goods and services (here, hotels) : Why pay more? What "opaque hotel inventory" teaches us about brands and search costs.
Trade Marks and Domain Names
Kat Eleonora Rosati discusses a recent US
trade mark case Beyoncé Giselle Knowles-Carter, et al.,
v. Feyoncé, Inc. et al., 16-CV-2532 (AJN), where the US District Court for Southern District of New York focused on determining whether products
carrying the word FEYONCÉ are sponsored by or affiliated with famous singer
Beyoncé, or blur the distinctiveness of her mark: Does FEYONCÉ
blur BEYONCÉ's distinctiveness?
Kat Neil Wilkof considers the differences in connection with search costs and brand value between “branded” and “unbranded” goods and services (here, hotels) : Why pay more? What "opaque hotel inventory" teaches us about brands and search costs.
Kat friends Lau Kok Keng, Nicholas Lauw and Jiamin Leow collectively report on a recent decision rendered by the Singapore
Court of Appeal in a case between Swatch and Apple over a claim of confusing similarity of their
respective marks - TICK DIFFERENT and THINK DIFFERENT: Swatch versus
Apple: If you "Tick different" does that mean that you "THINK
DIFFERENT"?
Can a US corporation selling construction
software only in the Americas under the name ARGOS be sued for infringement of
a registered trade mark by a UK- based consumer goods retailer who trades
mainly in the UK and Ireland under the same name? GuestKat Rosie
Burbidge discusses in Argos goes to
the Court of Appeal but leaves empty handed.
Darren Meale of Simmons & Simmons presents his fourth installment [previously: here, here, here] of the Retromark trade mark litigation round
up: Retromark
Volume IV: the last six months in trade marks.
Patents
In the first of her posts on food innovation
in celebration of World Food Day, InternKat Rose Hughes indulges her foodie
tendencies and mulls over the fascinating field of food inventions: World Food
Day! Patentable foods: The "Impossible" and the eggless.
Copyright
GuestKat Nedim Malovic provides his
insights about a decision of the Board of the
Swedish Advertising Ombudsman, according to
which a well-known Distracted Boyfriend
meme used for advertisement could be considered sexually discriminatory and
should consequently be banned: Advertisement
distributed by Swedish ISP held to be sexually discriminatory.
Can copyright vest
in mascots and characters? This, in a nutshell, is the question that the
Italian Supreme Court had to address in Ralph v Mediaset and Others, decision 14635/2018. Kat Eleonora Rosati reports: Italian Supreme Court
holds that an unauthorized derivative work may be both infringing and
protectable.
In Bastei Lübbe, C-149/17, a
reference for a preliminary ruling from Germany, CJEU weighed on the nature of
penalties and measures to be taken in copyright infringement cases. Eleonora’s
commentary is available here: CJEU weighs on
liability of owner of internet connection used to infringe copyright.
IPR Highlights
Katfriend Riyadh Al-Balushi (a PhD candidate at
SOAS University of London) provides an
update on the latest developments on the Gulf Cooperation Council crisis: GCC diplomaticcrisis update: Qatar’s new request for consultation with Saudi to address IPviolations.
As the
Brexit starts to heat up, the IPKat has an update from Darren Meale, who
has been closely following the countdown to "B-day": Brexit and
Brands Part 4.
GuestKat Rosie Burbidge
reports from IR Global’s event on
IP and blockchain, where a select gathering of IP experts from around the world
sat down in a London and considered the merits of blockchain and what it could
mean for the (intellectual property) future: Blockchain and
intellectual property - where are we now and what does the future have in
store?
Kat Neil Wilkof presents to IPKat readers with
a special interview with the President of the Austrian Patent Office, Mariana Karepova, who discusses IP law and practice from the Austrian perspective. Special
interview with Mariana Karepova, the President of the Austrian Patent Office.
ChIPs Global Summit in Washington D.C. this year focused on the theme of "Exploring
New Fronts", covering cutting-edge developments in the law, the shifting
regulatory landscape for technology companies, challenges facing general
counsel, and diversity and inclusion strategies available. The AmeriKat Annsley Merelle Ward summarises the top six key
takeaways: ChIPs Global
Summit Report 1: Politics and Technology - When D.C. met Silicon Valley
Book Review
GuestKat Mathilde Pavis reviews a recently
published third volume of Kritica –
Essays on Intellectual Property law (editors Haans Ullrich, Peter Drahos
and Gustavo Ghidini), which seeks to bring together highly conceptual and theoretical criticisms of
the IP system: Book review:
Kritika - Essays on Intellectual Property (vol 3)
Weekly
Roundups: Never Too Late; and Tuesday Tiddlywinks.
Image
Credits: LindsayKay6
PREVIOUSLY ON NEVER TOO LATE
Never Too Late 202 [Week ending 7
October] Looking to discuss the latest
developments in competition law in the pharma sector? Here’s an event for you |
Public procurement of pharmaceuticals and the patent system, the first date of
a stormy relationship? | What may be the main (potential) events in the life of
an EU/national trade mark? Here's a new map | Event: Computer-Implemented
Inventions - Monday 8 Oct 2018 | Can
warehouse storage of copyright-infringing products be considered an act of
distribution? AG Campos advises CJEU to rule 'yes' | Copyright monetisation:
does technology help or hinder? IPWeek @ SG 2018 | Around the IP Blogs! | Friday
Fantasies
Never Too Late 201 [Weeks ending 23 and 30
Sep] UK copyright in a no-deal Brexit
scenario: what will happen? | No deal Brexit - what does it mean for exhaustion
of rights? |No deal Brexit - what will happen to patents - particularly SPCs
and the UPC? No deal Brexit - what does it mean for registered Community
designs and trade marks | Will there be a “Fiverrization” of the creative
industries? | IPWeek @ SG: IP Offices still searching for (the holy grail) of
innovation and incentives: the view from | IPWeek @ SG AIPPI Congress Report 1:
Standard essential patents – maximizing value before enforcement | AIPPI
Congress Report 2: Out of term - provisional and post term patent enforcement |
AIPPI Congress Report 3: Hot topics in IP | and AIPPI Congress Report 4: A
balancing act - copyright versus other rights | How Singapore Is Fast-Tracking
FinTech Patent Applications (and making more "Crazy Rich Asians"? |
Evolving concepts of work and sustainability of copyright: the curious case of
curated fireworks displays | US Copyright Office Review Board denies
registration of ‘Vodafone Speechmark’ | After UEFA’s Starball logo, also the
EURO Trophy has been denied copyright registration | Using copyright-protected
material as evidence in a court proceeding | Paris tribunal guts Twitter’s
T&Cs… including the copyright clause for user-generated content | Around
the IP Blogs!
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: if you missed the IPKat last week!
Reviewed by Ieva Giedrimaite
on
Wednesday, October 31, 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