Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

The weekend is here, but you can’t really enjoy it if you don’t read Never Too Late first!


Africa Correspondent Chijioke Okorie discusses the judgment of the Dutch Court of Hague in Ancientgrain BV and Bakels Senior NV delivered on 21st November 2018 and what this decision means for Ethiopia’s battle to legally export Teff flour.
Someone said pasta?

GuestKat Rose Hughes reports on the notification that the pass mark of 2018 FD4 (P6, Infringement and Validity) has been reduced to 47% (from 50%) in view of a significant drop in candidates achieving a pass mark. Still Rose discusses two judgments relating to Genentech's EP (UK) patent for an anti-IL-17 antibody and its use in the treatment of psoriasis and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), relating, the first to the validity of the patent, the second, to the validity of a Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) sought by Genentech based on the patent and Lilly's market authorization for Taltz. 
GuestKat Cecilia Sbrolli reports on the design patent rights for pasta shapes obtained by Giovanni Rana and Barilla in the US and discusses the possibility to protect food recipes under US design patents.


Hayleigh Bosher writes about the last developments in the copyright reform while Katfriend Michelle Tong reports on a recent decision of the Review Board of the US Copyright Office analysing the originality threshold to protect works under copyright.

Kat Neil Wilkoff discusses whether it makes sense to talk about innovation in the context of copyright when the contents are intended to entertain the masses.
Kat friend John William Shaw ponders over the potential outcome of one of the Fortnite litigation disputing copyright ownership in dance moves reproduced in video games if one of the case were heard in the UK.

Former GuestKat Mirko Brüß takes a look to a recent decision of the Swiss top court concerning the unavailability of blocking injunctions in that country.

Kat Eleonora Rosati provides her insights on the
Milan Court of First Instance's interim ruling  in favour of the company that manages Banksy’s IP rights. The application sought to repress the unauthorized use of Banksy's registered trade marks and reproductions of his/her artworks in the context of an art exhibition in Milan.

Trade marks

InternKat Antonella Gentile discusses the complex formulation of the third indent of Article 7(1)(e) of Regulation 2017/1001 (EUTMR)/Article 4(1)(e) of Directive 2015/2436 “The shape, or another characteristic, which gives substantial value to the goods”.
GuestKat Ieva Giedrimaite takes a look at the possibility for a hashtag to function as a trade mark and the consequences of the use of a trade mark as a hashtag.

Asia Correspondent Tian Lu discusses a recent decision of the Beijing IP Court related to Caishen, the Chinese version of the God of Wealth.

GuestKat Nedim Malovic reports on a decision of the General Court of the European Union concerning the possibility for a company which holds a trade mark registration consisting of a heart for pharmaceutical drugs to register that identical logo for cardiovascular research services.

IPR Carousel

InternKat Tosshan Ramgolam takes a look to the Law Society guidance regarding what changes a no-deal Brexit would bring to the IP law of the United Kingdom.

Kat friend Fredy Sánchez Merino reports on IP developments in Latin America.
Event reports

Kat friend Nicholas Round provides a summary of the Airbus panel seminar in Toulouse while GuestKat Peter Ling reports on the eleventh edition of University of Geneva’s “Yearly Conference on Intellectual Property” dedicated to non-traditional trade marks.

Never Too Late 218 [Week ending 23 Feb] Purity can be unconventional, a new position for the EPO boards of appeal (T 1085/13) |EPO's Administrative Council powerless to amend the EPC: The latest on T 1063/18 | Annual Cambridge CIPIL Conference on mens rea in IP | Book review: Assessing Intellectual Property Compliance in Contemporary China | Copyright Trolling: Abusive Litigation Based on a GPL Compliance | Facebook found liable for hosting links to unlicensed content | Digitized images of works in the public domain: what rights vest in them? Analysis of the recent BGH Reiss-Engelhorn judgment - Part 1 | Digitized images of works in the public domain: what rights vest in them? Analysis of the recent BGH Reiss-Engelhorn judgment - Part 2 | ‘Glen Buchenbach’ is a misleading indication, Hamburg Court rules | Cyprus modernizes Trade Marks Act following implementation of the EU Trade Mark Directive | BOOKING.COM – When does adding a generic TLD to a generic word make the sign non-generic? | Britannia Rules on SEPs – But is it FRAND? | Breaking: New referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal on double-patenting
Never Too Late 217 [Week ending 17 Feb] Further thoughts on Levola Hengelo v Smilde Foods and the taste of cheese: did the Court create a "validation" test? | Summary of the roundtable organised by the Nigerian Copyright Commission | BREAKING: Agreement on DSM Directive reached in trilogue| Gigi Hadid faces another Copyright Infringement Claim after posting picture of herself on Instagram |Red Sole Diaries: another chapter | Validity of a Supplementary Protection Certificate. Testing the boundaries in a new ruling by the Swiss Tribunal Federal| Closing AGPL cloud services loop-hole: a MongoDB approach |Book review: Tritton on Intellectual Property in Europe |IP News from the Southern Cone
Never Too Late 216 [Week ending 10 Feb] The value gap proposal in the latest Franco-German deal: what are the key points? | Danish Supreme Court in Würtz v Coop confirms existence of "de minimis" copyright exception for use of applied art in marketing materials | Swedish Patents and Market Court of Appeal finds request for blocking injunction against ISP disproportionate | General Court refuses DeepMind's trade mark for STREAMS | POSTAUTO: Acquired Distinctiveness for Non-Core Goods and Services? | A view of the Greek draft trademark law after the close of public consultations | 'CHIARA FERRAGNI' not confusingly similar to 'CHIARA', rules EU General Court | Fin(n)ishing late: New Finnish Trade Mark Act and other IP reforms eagerly awaited | Drinking wine from a Pringles can: parody or trade mark infringement? | Applying the Actavis questions to numerical limitations: Regen Lab v Estar | Formstein defence in the UK? Technetix B.V. v Teleste Limited | Your FRANDly Update: HTC v Ericsson, 5G/IoT SEP Licensing Consultation, Globalization of FRAND, European Parliament SEP analysis & more | EUIPO Strategic Plan 2025: Call for views | Asian IP express: on the First IP & Innovation Researchers of Asia Conference | Report on MIP International Women's forum | Kenyan Reform on Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions: Two Year On | Book review: The Platform Economy - Unraveling the Legal Status of Online Intermediaries
Never Too Late 215 [Week ending 3 Feb] EUIPO Fifth Board of Appeal says that a request for cancellation is unfounded when based on non-existent earlier right | CJEU: ‘EZMIX’ devoid of distinctive character and descriptive for software used in music production | If you Trespass on a trade mark you won't have a FUNTIME | Copyright infringement: physically possible? | German Court determines the limits of private copying | Exploiting arrangements of traditional (gospel or folk) music in South Africa | Thinking out loud on composers, craftsmanship and copycats | VMware GPL case is back in court—will we finally get some clarity on the meaning of "derivative work"? | PI awarded following disagreement with EPO on added matter - Novartis v Dr Reddy's | Court of Appeal reaffirms English Court as forum for SEP disputes | The novelty of “on sale inventions” under a confidentiality agreement with regards to an “on sale” invention: the US Supreme Court rules | China IP Office released major IP statistics of 2018 | New Chinese E-Commerce Law and its impact on IPR protection | Hola, I will have the IP--and a shot of Tequila | Book Review: Concise European Trade Mark Law | Writing a proposal for an LLM/PhD thesis: what do you need to think about? | Young ICCA – WIPO Seminar on IP Arbitration | Interested in fashion law? Here's a 1-day course which comes with a 10% discount for IPKat readers | Here's a new edition of Retromark ... to catch up with all the (cool) trade mark news! | The IPKat welcomes first Africa correspondent
Never Too Late 214 [Week ending 27 Jan] Book Review:International Patent Litigation – Developing an Effective Strategy | The Fortnite lawsuits: why performers stand a fighting chance to beat the game | Can you sell a quotation…of dance? Another perspective on the ‘Fortnite’ lawsuits | CHEESE for (cannabis) seeds not a valid trade mark, says EUIPO First Board of Appeal |So just how much is the iPhone aspirational? | Swedish patent case-law and 2018 patent highlights | Swedish Supreme Court finds hypothetical licence fee too hypothetical | Is a prohibition to use also a proper reason not to use? AG Szpunar thinks not necessarily | The CNY 260 million fine on QVOD is final! |Full speed ahead for DeepMind's AI patent applications | Is it time to rethink the patent drawing requirements? |Why was there a need for a Trade Secrets Directive? An Italian perspective | Preliminary injunctions in parallel patent infringement proceedings. Lessons to learn | Forfeiture of a trade mark as part a criminal conviction: a Nigerian perspective | In memoriam Walter Chandoha, the man who revolutionized the photography of cats (and announcing an IPKat call for pictures)

Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Antonella Gentile on Saturday, April 13, 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.