Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

Last week was definitely punctuated with a lot of developments in copyright law! If you missed out on some of these developments, as well as those in other areas of IP, never fear - Never Too Late is here!


SpecialKat Hayleigh Bosher reports on an injunction claim brought by Nintendo against 5 UK ISPs against several websites offering devices to circumvent technical protection measures on the Nintendo Switch. This claim introduced an element of novelty by bringing the claim on statutory protection under the CDPA 1988, as well as trade mark rights. 

SpecialKat Chijioke Okorie examines some of the highlights of Kenya’s Copyright (Amendment) Act 2019, which repealed some elements of the original Copyright Act of Kenya to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty and a myriad of other issues. 

Katfriend Simon Geiregat reports on a case from the French court of first instance, which ruled that subscribers to a videogame distribution platform should be able to resell their videogames

Thomas Key explores the advantages and remedies to potential drawbacks of the Small Claims Copyright Bill illustrated through the Judiciary Committee’s report to the Senate. 

Have Associated Newspapers made a Royal error publishing Meghan Markle’s private letter? SpecialKat Hayleigh Bosher analyses the situation, looking at the issues of copyright, moral rights, defamation, privacy and data protection that surround it. 

Professor Jeremy de Beer looks at a recent Canadian decision on Crown copyright, Keatley Surveying v Teranet, in his Guest Post, where the Supreme Court of Canada held that the government can get copyright protection.


Rose Hughes reports on case G2/19, which the Enlarged Board of Appeal released its full reasoning for. The appeal related to a case in which a third party had submitted observations pursuant to Article 115 EPC that a patent application lacked clarity. 

With injunctions in patent law an increasingly hot topic in Europe, Léon Dijkman looks at recent announcements by the German Ministry of Justice that a proposal for the amendment of the German patent act is forthcoming.

Trade Marks

The issue of registering trade marks of football clubs has always posed a problem, as demonstrated by rejection by the UKIPO of Liverpool Football Club’s application to register ‘LIVERPOOL’ as a UK trade mark. Alex Woolgar looks at this in more detail. 

We all recognise the mark “Uber”, but is it a strong brand? Kat Neil Wilkof analyses this mark which, whilst subject to broad name recognition, struggles commercially as a brand.


The CJEU published its much awaited judgment in C-18/18 Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Irelandwhich ruled that an intermediary can be ordered to remove content identical and equivalent to that found illegal, also worldwide, as reported by Kat Eleonora Rosati. 


Mathilde Pavis provides an insight into the question of intellectual property policy in outer space addressed in a recent report by the University of Exeter, in light of increased commercialisation of activities in space and the expectation of space tourism.

Conference Offers

Kat Eleonora Rosati informs us of an IPKat reader discount offered on KNext365's  next ‘International Copyright Law’ conference, to be held in London on 3-4 December 2019.

Never Too Late 235 [Week ending 29th September] Is article 3 (a) of the Regulation (EC) 469/2009 disappearing into the mist, or is clarity round the corner? | AIPPI Congress Report 1: The Art of IP - Museums & Architecture | AIPPI Congress Report 2: Trade Secrets - Views from In-House Counsel | AIPPI Congress Report 3: Brexit, IP in Fashion and Customs & Border Control | Monday Miscellany | Zervos v Picasso, or copyright v droit d’auteur | Guest Post: Copyright Troll-[ing] Canadian Courts? Canada’s First Reverse Class Action Copyright Case | Guest Post: UK IPO Annual IP crime and enforcement report for 2018-2019 | There is No Such Thing as a Free Launch - CJEU Does Not Follow AG on Compensation for Wrongful PI | New CJEU referral on right of communication to the public... this time on seeding and de minimis threshold | [Guest Post] IP Education Series #1 | AIPPI Congress Report 4: Copyright in AI generated works | AG Pitruzzella advises CJEU to rule that proprietor of trade mark revoked for non-use can seek compensation for infringing acts committed prior to revocation | Beijing IP Court: mountain is excellent, but not exclusively so | Does IP boost the European economy? EPO and EUIPO say so

Never Too Late 234 [Week ending 15th September] AG Szpunar advises CJEU to rule that internet downloads of ebooks are covered by right of communication to the public, not distribution (so, no, there is no digital exhaustion under InfoSoc Directive) | CJEU confirms that German press publishers' right is unenforceable due to missed notification to the European Commission | CJEU rules that only requirement for copyright protection of designs is their originality | Drake sued for copyright infringement of a beat | Anne Black copyright dispute - originality: how low can you go? | Voice-overs, peer-to-peer recruitment platforms and IP rights: a survey of 200+ performers | Article 3(a) just keeps on giving: AG Opinion in SPC referrals C-650/17 and C-114/18 | Comments from the EPO President on the patentability of computer-implemented simulations (G 1/19) | An inappropriate use of discretion leads to ping-pong (T0688/16) | Swedish Patents and Market Court of Appeal requests CJEU to clarify concept of “public” in new CJEU reference | Book Review: Regulating Hosting ISPs' Responsibilities for Copyright Infringement | What's in a name? General Court rules conceptual comparison of names normally not possible | Cannot Register “IGP” for Paint in Switzerland – because It Could Be a PGI 

Never Too Late 233 [Week ending 8th September] YouTube takes copyright law into their own hands with new policy on music infringement | InterDigital starts Lenovo FRAND war, plus reader discount at SEP Strategy Conference | The patent debate surrounding PrEP, the game-changer in HIV prevention | What is the future of plausibility? AIPPI country survey results suggest plausibility requirement “undesirable” | Forthcoming ERA IP events with 25% IPKat discount | Book Review: Online Distribution of Content in the EU | The three Rs of legitimate expectation: Recognizability, recoverability and responsibility (T 0703/19) | The facepalm trade mark case in China | Around the IP Blogs | Commons Clause in open source licences: business necessity or betrayal of software freedom? | International jurisdiction in online EU trade mark infringement cases: CJEU rules that targeting may serve to establish jurisdiction | Can Africa’s trade agreements handle regional integration? | Has the EU lost its way on gene-editing?
Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Riana Harvey on Thursday, October 10, 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.