Around the IP blogs!

Did you survive the hottest days of the year (at least in some parts of Europe) and still want to know what is happening in the IP blogosphere?

Let’s find out it in this new edition of Around the IP blogs, which has a special focus on non-conventional trade marks, in particular, colours trade marks, smell, packaging and three dimensional marks.
This Kat wants to have the latest IP news


The 1709 Blog deals with the US District Court, Southern District of New York decision ruling that Warhol's 1984 "Prince Series" did not infringe Lynn Goldsmith's copyright on a Prince's photograph shot in 1981 for Newsweek which was never published.

Trade marks

The Kluwer Trade Mark Blog published a post concerning the decision of the Court of Venice regarding the producer of the famous Veuve Cliquot champagne and its colour jaune orange trade mark. 

Still the Kluwer Trade Mark Blog deals with the protection of smell and packaging from imitation and with the C-237/19, a preliminary ruling recently referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union by the Supreme Court of Hungary and concerning three-dimensional marks.

Finally the Kluwer Trade Mark Blog reports on the coming into force on June 17, 2019 of Canada’s new trade mark law. 


The Kluwer Patent Blog publishes a post concerning the patent prosecution estoppel and a post concerning the applicant’s right to re-establish under certain circumstances. 
Around the IP blogs! Around the IP blogs! Reviewed by Antonella Gentile on Sunday, July 28, 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.