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

The 205th edition of Never Too Late offers a tour around the IPKat world for those who may have missed the highlights!

Trade Marks

In 2017, 5.748 million trade mark applications were filed in China. A considerable amount of them may have been filed purely for hoarding and waiting for the right price to sell. China’s trade mark law adopts the first-to-file principle, yet it does not explicitly stipulate the regulatory measures to prevent malicious applications. The Supreme People’s Court of China ruling might be a game changer. The Court clarified that hoarding a large number of trade marks without intention to use falls within the scope of “other illegitimate means” prohibited by Article 44, Section 1 of China’s Trademark Law. IPKat Asia Correspondent Tian Lu reports: ChineseSupreme Court: hoarding trade marks in bad faith falls within scope of“illegitimate means”.

GuestKat Nedim Malovic discusses a recent decision rendered by EUIPO Fifth Board of Appeal, which ruled on a Turkish chef’s attempt to protect how he ‘elegantly’ cuts meat and sprinkles salt as a motion mark.  3-second cinematic sequence sufficiently distinctive to be a trade mark, says EUIPO Fifth Board of Appeal.

Kat Eleonora Rosati has dissected Donald Trump’s recent post of an image of himself accompanied by the caption 'Sanctions Are Coming' from an IP perspective. Could such post amount to a trade mark misuse or a copyrights infringement?  'Winter Is Coming' vs 'Sanctions Are Coming': a 'trademark misuse' also in languages other than Dothraki?
Kat enjoying IP cocktail

IPR Cocktail

The  sale by Christie of a painting by Edmond de Belamy,  entirely created by using Artificial intelligence (AI), raises fundamental questions as to how centuries of IP law will interact with AI, the obvious question being whether there can be copyright in an AI-created portrait. Kat friend, Alexander de Leeuw at Dutch IP firm, Brinkhof, reports: Auctioning Art(ificial Intelligence): The IP implications of Edmond de Belamy.

The Annual Conference of the European Policy for Intellectual Property Association, “IP in Data-Driven Economies: New Challenges for Law, Economics and Social Sciences”, took place in Berlin between September 5th-7th. Topics ranged from IP and international trade to industrial espionage activities of (the then) East Germany, big data, standard essential patents (SEP), economic models for IP rights and IP in a digital world. Kat friend N Cansin Karga Giritli from Glasgow University provides a: Report from 2018Annual Meeting of the European Policy for Intellectual Property Association.

Kat Neil Wilkof contemplates on how anti-competitive behaviour by an industry leader hinders innovation. Such measures as non-compete clauses, “overly tight intellectual-property rules” and a loose view of what constitutes an anti-competitive acquisition involving market leaders are considered: The drumbeat gets louder: is anti-competitive conduct trumping innovation as the foundation for high tech dominance?

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has recently issued a judgment in E.S. v Austria, Application No 38450/12, which might be relevant for the interpretation and application of public policy/morality exclusions, especially in the case of blasphemous and offensive subject matter. Kat Eleonora Rosati provides her insights: Criminal conviction over disparaging religious doctrines not a violation of freedom of expression: potential IP implications of the latest ECtHR ruling.

Hayleigh Bosher brings a summary of the highlights from Thomson Reuters Practical Law 4th Annual Trade Mark Conference, which took place in London: Event Report: Trade Mark Conference 2018.


IPKat copyright guru Eleonora Rosati shares another map she has created for her students. This time it is devoted to the main potential events in the life of a copyright work in Europe: What can be the main events in the life of a copyright work in Europe? Here's another map.


GuestKat, Rosie Burbidge reports on David Stone's talk about the current and anticipated EU designs law changes: Complicating designs: whither the EU reforms, and what impact will Brexit have?

Book Review

IPKat Book Review Editor Hayleigh Bosher takes on Kerly's Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names, which is considered the leading text on trade marks and trade names, having provided expert guidance on all aspects of UK trade mark law since 1894. The latest (16th!) edition continues the tradition, offering the reader a holistic and thoroughly-detailed analysis of trade mark law, including major updates in line with EU reforms and the latest case law developments. Book Review: Kerly’s Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names

Image Credits: In NYC


Never Too Late 20[Week ending 28 Oct] Court of Appeal reaffirms UK as SEP litigation hotspot in upholding Birss J in Unwired Planet | Much Ado About FRAND: What you need to know about today's Court of Appeal Unwired Planet decision | AIPPI UK Rapid Response Event: Unwired Planet v Huawei - 13 November at 6PM | Lord Kitchin applies the "markedly different" infringement approach in Actavis v Eli Lilly in Icescape v Ice-World | AG Szpunar advises CJEU to rule that copyright cannot subsist in military report in important fundamental rights case | Australia considers reform of its website blocking regime, including possibility to target search engines and new types of injunctions | Swedish Court orders ISP to block access to The Pirate Bay and other Torrent sites | What's your party drink? - Asolo v Red Bull | Questioning the trade mark judges

Never Too Late 203 [Weeks ending 14 and 21 Oct] Does FEYONCÉ blur BEYONCÉ's distinctiveness? | Why pay more? What "opaque hotel inventory" teaches us about brands and search costs. | Swatch versus Apple: If you "Tick different" does that mean that you "THINK DIFFERENT"? | Argos goes to the Court of Appeal but leaves empty handed | Retromark Volume IV: the last six months in trade marks | World Food Day! Patentable foods: The "Impossible" and the eggless | Advertisement distributed by Swedish ISP held to be sexually discriminatory | Italian Supreme Court holds that an unauthorized derivative work may be both infringing and protectable | CJEU weighs on liability of owner of internet connection used to infringe copyright | GCC diplomaticcrisis update: Qatar’s new request for consultation with Saudi to address IPviolations | Brexit and Brands Part 4 | Blockchain and intellectual property - where are we now and what does the future have in store? | Special interview with Mariana Karepova, the President of the Austrian Patent Office | ChIPs Global Summit Report 1: Politics and Technology - When D.C. met Silicon Valley | Book review: Kritika - Essays on Intellectual Property (vol 3) | Tuesday Tiddlywinks

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: if you missed the IPKat last week! Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Ieva Giedrimaite on Tuesday, November 27, 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.