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

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!

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 KengNicholas 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: hereherehereof the Retromark trade mark litigation round up: Retromark Volume IV: the last six months in trade marks.


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.


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


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! Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Ieva Giedrimaite on Wednesday, October 31, 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.