Never too late: If you missed the IPKat posts last week!

The 212th edition of Never Too Late is out!


In A 12th centuty tale of an orphan work (it’s all about the teeth), Kat Neil J. Wilkof reports on the fascinating inquiry into the author of orphan works in a pre-copyright law times. This inquiry involves, among others, dental records and pigments and suggests the role of women creators in medieval times.

Kat Eleonora Rosati analyses AG Szpunar Opinion in Spiegel Online, C-516/18. This Opinion advises the CJEU to rule that the exception within Article 5(3)(d) of the InfoSoc Directive requires one to consider the purpose of the quotation at issue, and that the fundamental rights like freedom of expression do not allow EU Member States to go beyond the catalogue of exceptions in Article 5 therein to envisage new exceptions or even introduce a general fair use clause. 

In Drinking culture: what's wrong with it? Katfriend Federica Pezza discusses the Italian dispute regarding street artist Jorit Agoch whose artistic production have been included in a recent campaign launched by Peroni beer company. Federica analyses the problem of protectability of street art under Italian law and, consequently, the balance between copyright protection and freedom of panorama. 

Trade marks

In Brexit and Brands - 77 days to go Darren Meale gives an overview of how things might look after exit day (both with or without deal) analysing the TM Exit Regs. Moreover he discusses what we know and what we don’t know yet about the 'cloning' regime.


In The intricable question of “inadmissible” or “late filed” appeals – G1/18, Rose Hughes analyses the pending referral on the question of “inadmissible” or “late filed” appeals regarding the problem of the refund of the appeal fee. 

Rose Hughes publishes the first part of the review of the “Pregabalin: Where stand plausibility and Swiss-formclaims” event hold at UCL a “great and good pass comment” on Warner Lambert v Actavis. This first post focuses on the issue of plausibility. 

IPR Carousel

GuestsKat Alex Woolgar, in his post "Untangling jurisdiction under the Design and Brussels Regulations: should I stay or...?", considers the interaction between the specific jurisdictional rules regarding claims involving EU unitary IP rights and the jurisdictional rules under the Brussels regulation in light of the CJEU decisions in case C-617/15 (Hummel v Nike) and joined Cases C-24/16 and C-25/16 (Nintendo v BigBen Interactive) and the subsequent English court’s decision in Poul Chang Metal Industry Company Ltd v Bailcast Ltd and Anor.

Book Reviews

SpecialKat Hayleigh Bosher announces the winners of the 2018 IPKat Book of the Year Award. The Best Patent Book: Patent Pledges Global Perspectives on Patent Law's Private Ordering Frontier. The best Copyright Books: Propertizing European Copyright, by Caterina Sganga and Laddie, Prescot and Vitoria, Modern Law of Copyright. The best Trade Mark book: The Protection of Non-Traditional Trademarks: Critical Perspectives by Irene Calboli and Martin Senftleben. The best Design Book: David Stone's European Design Law: A Practitioner's Guide and finally the Best IP Book: Intellectual Property and the Judiciary, edited by Christophe Geiger, Craig Allen Nard and and Xavier Seuba.

The subject matter of Intellectual Property by Justine Pila studies terms such as “invention” and “trade mark” in the context of their use by legal officials. SpecialKat Hayleigh Bosher reviews it.

GuestKat Rosie Burbidge reviews The EU Design Approach, edited by Annette Kur, Marianne Levin and Jens Schovsbo. A book which considers the background to and history of designs through to considering designs in a global context including the impact of new technologies such as 3D printing.



Never Too Late 2011 [Week ending 6 Jan] EUIPO Fourth Board of Appeal allows registration of Bacardi bottle as an EUTM | Beats secures trade mark victory with EUIPO Fourth Board of Appeal | Thanks to higher resolution image, American Airlines has eventually managed to register its logo with the US Copyright Office| You can't buy love ... nor can you prevent others from using it in their trade marks |The HABITAT mark (and co-habitation): Part II |Trade mark classes are not Nice and easy | Lets Get It On...Trial - Another Copyright Infringement Case for Ed Sheeran |Smells like IP infringement? |Orphan Drugs, a successful regulation after all? Or just about to experience its pitfalls?| Choco-tech: A Christmas Selection Box | Book review: Law, Art and The Commons.

Never Too Late 210 [Week ending 23 Dec] Time to celebrate: IPKat remains the most popular IP blog and the most popular copyright blog of all time! | Substance or device - a distinction without a difference? | Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore. Is the thirty-eight session going to be the lucky one? | The Opinion of the Advocate General in the case C-443/17 (Abraxis case). A lost case for second medical indication SPCs? | German Court prohibits sale of certain iPhone models | In math we trust – China cyberspace writers’ village joins judicial blockchain platform | A Kat's 2018 Copyright Awards | CJEU rules that warehouse storage of counterfeits due for sale falls within scope of distribution right | Why is this Kat laughing once again (hint: it's all about another blue shirt in his wardrobe)? | Brent takes a tumble, trade marks invalidated for being descriptive

Never Too Late 209 [Week ending 16 Dec] BREAKING: AG Szpunar advises CJEU to rule that unlicensed sampling MAY be a copyright infringement and German free use may be contrary to EU law | The AG Opinion in Metall auf Metall: it's not a fundamental rights violation to say that sampling requires a licence | AG Hogan advises CJEU to rule that German press publishers' right is unenforceable | EU Copyright Reform, Fundamental Rights & Life as CJEU Judge at the ERA Copyright Conference | Building a Long Term Brand Protection solution - the Lego story [Part 3] | Whole visible surface or predominant colour? Cadbury's plays spot the series mark | Trade marks: the limits to a MONSTER’s reach in Singapth seore | EPLAW Congress Report: Who has the better patent litigation tools in Europe? | Tennis in 2018: Did intellectual property hold serve? | Book Review: The Modern Law of Copyright AKA Laddie, Prescott and Vitoria | Book Review: Reconciling Copyright with Cumulative Creativity | Around the IP Blogs!

Never Too Late 208 [Week ending 9 Dec] Commercial use of image rights: Paris Tribunal boosts models and performers’ protection | General rules on direct and indirect liability for copyright infringement instead of Art. 13 | Double trouble: fresh CJEU reference from Swedish Supreme Court regarding scope of communication to the public inside cars | BREAKING NEWS: The first Counterfeit and Piracy Watch List has been published! | First blocking orders issued in Greece ... but how effective are they? | ECtHR rules that prohibiting linking to defamatory content might be freedom of expression violation: what implications (if any) for copyright? | Protecting reggae – Cultural heritage needs IP | Revenge porn: …still no IP rights in sight | BREAKING: TBA decides that Rule 28(2) EPC, excluding plant products produced by essentially biological processes from patentability, is void | ”Baby you can drive my car” period is over. Welcome the Self-driving vehicles | Brand Protection - fresh perspectives from a Frankfurt conference [Part 1]; and Brand Protection Conference [Part 2] | New joint IPKat/BLACA event! The topic is ... Copyright and Artificial Intelligence | Book review: Copyright law and derivative works

Never Too Late 207 [Week ending 2 Dec] draft Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market: Contractual override and the new exceptions in the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Proposal | Venice court tackles copyright protection for architectural works as applied to yachts | Marrakesh Treaty is no paper tiger: EU Commission sues 17 countries for non-compliance | Give Africa its cultural heritage back … But keep its digital cultural heritage? | The IP term (thus far) of the millennium: the curious story of the adoption of "patent troll" and "internet trolling" | No pain, no gain: Plausibility in Warner-Lambert v Actavis | Testing the boundaries of subjectivity: Infringement of Swiss-type claims in Warner-Lambert v Actavis | Is SPINNING generic? EU General Court explains how the relevant assessment is to be undertaken | High Court employs ‘intention to target’ approach to determine application of EU/UK law in online trade mark infringement case | There's a new IPO report on designs infringement - game-changer or stating the obvious? | Thursday Thunders
Never too late: If you missed the IPKat posts last week! Never too late: If you missed the IPKat posts last week! Reviewed by Antonella Gentile on Saturday, February 09, 2019 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.