What is happening in the IP blogsphere? Let's have a look with this new edition of Around the Blogs!
Trade marks
The Kluwer Trademark blog analyses the Danish Commercial and Maritime High Court decision which balances the legal interest in the family name Ørsted against the commercial interest in the name of Ørsted by ruling on the right to register and use several trade marks and domains including or consisting of ØRSTED.
Patentlyo publishes a post regarding the US Supreme Court’s decision in Iancu v. Brunetti concerning the registration as trade marks of marks that are “scandalous” or “immoral.”
 |
| So many interesting news! |
The 1709 Blog publishes a post concerning the late French fashion photographer Guy Bourdin’s secret list of all the titles he had imagined for a particular photograph and the possible “droit d’auteur” on this list.
Patentlyo deals with the Supreme Court decision to grant certiorari in the public access case of Georgia v. PublicResource.org Inc. The case focuses on Georgia official statutory code with official annotations and copyright infringement.
The Kluwer Copyright Blog takes a look at the report of the Canadian Standing Committee on Industry, Science & Technology, released earlier this month.
Patents
The Kluwer Patent Blog reviews decisions T-2707/16 and T-2377/17 of the EPO Boards of Appeal, regarding the contributing factors to the finding of a substantial procedural violation and the conditions to reimburse the appeal fee.
Do you want to reuse the IPKat content? Please refer to our
Policies section.
If you have any queries or requests for permission, please get in touch with the IPKat team.
Comments
Post a Comment
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