Around the IP Blogs

September marks the beginning of the academic year and an official end to the summer break. To get you back into things, here is a summary what has been going on in the IP blogosphere over the past week!
September, here we go again!


The Kluwer Patent Blog focuses on the Unitary Patent system, considering that Brexit should not result in delays to German ratification of the Unitary Patent Court Agreement, as well as examining the progress of other Unitary Patent Court Member States in its pursuit of ratification.

The IPWatchdog provides an overview of the drone delivery technology patent battle between Amazon and Walmart, who from June 2018 to June 2019 have filed 54 and 97 drone patent applications to the WIPO respectively.

PatentlyO highlights how, when it comes to eligibility, commercial success is irrelevant to inventive concept analysis, regarding a patent submission for an automated investment system.

Interestingly, IPWatchdog also suggests that the best way to protect a business method is to reframe it as a technical invention.

Trade Marks

The Kluwer Trademark Blog examines two similar cases heard in the Spanish courts regarding the use of well-known trade marks to promote contests, which reached different verdicts as to whether trade mark infringement had arisen from such use.


The Kluwer Copyright Blog looks at a case heard in the United States Courts of Appeals (Second Circuit) - Ennio Morricone Music Inc. v. Bixio Music Group Ltd - that highlights differences between Italian and U.S. copyright law regarding allocation of authorship where a work is commissioned.

Trade Secrets

The Written Description blog scrutinises U.S. laws on trade secrets, in light of the recent indictment of former Google employee Anthony Levandowski on charges of trade secret theft.
Around the IP Blogs Around the IP Blogs Reviewed by Riana Harvey on Monday, September 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.