Another week, another edition of Never Too Late! Last week brought plenty of posts from Kats and Katfriends alike. If you missed them, don't worry - we will make sure you are caught up on all of the action!
Copyright
Alexandra Mezulanik, research assistant at UCL IBIL, examines the much anticipated decision in Martin v Kogan of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. This case, concerning the joint authorship of the screenplay of the 'Florence Foster Jenkins' film, revisited the (admittedly) thorny issue of joint authorship of copyright works.
SpecialKat Chijioke Okorie looks at some of the highlights of the recently published African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO) Model Law on Copyright and Related Rights.
Patents
GuestKat Rose Hughes brings breaking news, reporting on the UK Supreme Court decision in Shanks v Unilever, in which Professor Shanks was (finally) granted £2 million in compensation for his invention from his former employer Unilever.
In 'How and where may implementers sue for FRAND-licences?', Lars Brahms looks at the recent England and Wales High Court decision of Vestel Elektronik Sanayi v HEVC Advance LLC, which raised this question as well as the questions of what the proper basis would be for such a claim, and where this claim might be brought.
Trade Marks
GuestKat Nedim Malovic examines an intriguing decision from the General Court, which stated that the relevant public's attention is 'average at best' when assessing likelihood of confusion relating to games and computer games. This arose in relation to an application to register the word mark 'DUNGEONS', which was opposed by the owners of the EUTM 'Dungeons & Dragons'.
Former GuestKat Darren Meale returns to bring us the sixth volume of Retromark, looking back on the last six months of trade marks, from the revoked McDonald's 'Mc' EU trade mark to the most recent Skykick referral and more.
You thought you had seen the last of the Rubik's cube? Think again! Kat Eleonora Rosati reports on the reappearance of the Rubik's cube in the General Court, which confirmed the cancellation of the EUTM consisting of the shape of the Rubik's cube.
GuestKat Antonella Gentile examines the Opinion of AG Kokott in T-766/18 P, concerning the EU trade mark for Halloumi, where the distinctive character of collective and geographic collective trade marks and their interplay with geographical indications was considered.
IP Education Series
The IP Education Series is back with its latest instalment! This time we hear from IP lawyer Agathe Michel-de Cazotte, who writes on her experience supporting the IP Management module at Cass Business School (City, University of London).
Communication to the public
Katfriend Fredy Sánchez Merino reports on an interesting case from Colombia, which considered the question of whether use of audiovisual works in public transport would be considered an act of communication to the public, such that a collecting society could demand payment of royalties.
Event Reports
GuestKat Antonella Gentile also provides coverage of the Tertulia on EUIPO Board of Appeal Case Law, held at the EUIPO Liaison Office in Brussels.
Book Reviews
SpecialKat Tian Lu provides an overview of Translation Accuracy and Dissemination of Disclosure of Patent Information: An Analysis of Translation and its Influence on Patent Law by Dr. Aline Larroyed.
Never Too Late 238 [Week ending 20th October] When is the “text-intended for grant” not intended for grant? (T 1003/19) | Richard Arnold to be sworn in as Lord Justice of Appeal on Thursday | [Guest Post] IP and AI - the debate continues, this time at WIPO | [Guest Post] IP in the global automotive industry: IP seminar at Volvo cars - day 1 | Book Review: Robot Rules, Regulating Artificial Intelligence | [BREAKING] A-G Tanchev finds lack of intention to use a trade mark can be indicative of bad faith & insufficiently clear and precise registrations may be contrary to public policy | When the unicorn loves its name recognition. But Wall Street, less so | [Guest Post] IP in the automotive industry: IP seminar at Volvo cars - day 2 | A casual case of contempt? Price v Filtcraft | Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week | That was a long break, now let’s go back south | A European perspective on paparazzi photographs of celebrities and lawsuits against celebrities over the posting of photographs of themselves | Around the IP Blogs | Monday Miscellany
Copyright
 |
| Looking back on another week of interesting IPKat news! |
Alexandra Mezulanik, research assistant at UCL IBIL, examines the much anticipated decision in Martin v Kogan of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. This case, concerning the joint authorship of the screenplay of the 'Florence Foster Jenkins' film, revisited the (admittedly) thorny issue of joint authorship of copyright works.
SpecialKat Chijioke Okorie looks at some of the highlights of the recently published African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO) Model Law on Copyright and Related Rights.
Patents
GuestKat Rose Hughes brings breaking news, reporting on the UK Supreme Court decision in Shanks v Unilever, in which Professor Shanks was (finally) granted £2 million in compensation for his invention from his former employer Unilever.
In 'How and where may implementers sue for FRAND-licences?', Lars Brahms looks at the recent England and Wales High Court decision of Vestel Elektronik Sanayi v HEVC Advance LLC, which raised this question as well as the questions of what the proper basis would be for such a claim, and where this claim might be brought.
Trade Marks
GuestKat Nedim Malovic examines an intriguing decision from the General Court, which stated that the relevant public's attention is 'average at best' when assessing likelihood of confusion relating to games and computer games. This arose in relation to an application to register the word mark 'DUNGEONS', which was opposed by the owners of the EUTM 'Dungeons & Dragons'.
Former GuestKat Darren Meale returns to bring us the sixth volume of Retromark, looking back on the last six months of trade marks, from the revoked McDonald's 'Mc' EU trade mark to the most recent Skykick referral and more.
You thought you had seen the last of the Rubik's cube? Think again! Kat Eleonora Rosati reports on the reappearance of the Rubik's cube in the General Court, which confirmed the cancellation of the EUTM consisting of the shape of the Rubik's cube.
GuestKat Antonella Gentile examines the Opinion of AG Kokott in T-766/18 P, concerning the EU trade mark for Halloumi, where the distinctive character of collective and geographic collective trade marks and their interplay with geographical indications was considered.
IP Education Series
The IP Education Series is back with its latest instalment! This time we hear from IP lawyer Agathe Michel-de Cazotte, who writes on her experience supporting the IP Management module at Cass Business School (City, University of London).
Communication to the public
Katfriend Fredy Sánchez Merino reports on an interesting case from Colombia, which considered the question of whether use of audiovisual works in public transport would be considered an act of communication to the public, such that a collecting society could demand payment of royalties.
Event Reports
GuestKat Antonella Gentile also provides coverage of the Tertulia on EUIPO Board of Appeal Case Law, held at the EUIPO Liaison Office in Brussels.
Book Reviews
SpecialKat Tian Lu provides an overview of Translation Accuracy and Dissemination of Disclosure of Patent Information: An Analysis of Translation and its Influence on Patent Law by Dr. Aline Larroyed.
Never Too Late 238 [Week ending 20th October] When is the “text-intended for grant” not intended for grant? (T 1003/19) | Richard Arnold to be sworn in as Lord Justice of Appeal on Thursday | [Guest Post] IP and AI - the debate continues, this time at WIPO | [Guest Post] IP in the global automotive industry: IP seminar at Volvo cars - day 1 | Book Review: Robot Rules, Regulating Artificial Intelligence | [BREAKING] A-G Tanchev finds lack of intention to use a trade mark can be indicative of bad faith & insufficiently clear and precise registrations may be contrary to public policy | When the unicorn loves its name recognition. But Wall Street, less so | [Guest Post] IP in the automotive industry: IP seminar at Volvo cars - day 2 | A casual case of contempt? Price v Filtcraft | Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week | That was a long break, now let’s go back south | A European perspective on paparazzi photographs of celebrities and lawsuits against celebrities over the posting of photographs of themselves | Around the IP Blogs | Monday Miscellany
Never Too Late 237 [Week ending 13th October] Fighting for your IP rights in Denmark – it’s expensive, but now maybe less so? | 2019 updates to the EPO Guidelines for Examination - the highlights | GSK fails in purple inhaler passing off claim against Sandoz and Vectura (...and breathe) | When it's time to pay for copyright infringement: the new "fork in the road" under Colombian law | Book Review: Digital Copyright Law and Practice | Beijing Internet Court: whether a short video is original or not has nothing to do with its length | Book Review: The Law of Domain Names and Cybersquatting
Never Too Late 236 [Week ending 6th October] Nintendo play ISP blocking to win | Kenya amends its Copyright Act to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty and address a myriad of other issues | Paris Court on digital exhaustion and videogames | US House Judiciary Committee votes to amend small-claims copyright bill (CASE Act) as Senate Judiciary issues favourable report on the bill | Have Associated Newspapers made a Royal error publishing Megan Markle’s private letter? | Can the Government Get Your Copyright? The Supreme Court of Canada Says “Yes”. | New decision of the Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal addresses interface between new safety regulation for packaging of pharmaceuticals and parallel imports | Enlarged Board of Appeal releases full reasoning in G2/19 | Industry takes stance on automatic patent injunctions as German Ministry of Justice considers reform of the patent law | Liverpool FC fails in attempt to register LIVERPOOL as trade mark | We all recognize the mark "Uber", but is it a strong brand? | BREAKING: CJEU rules that an intermediary can be ordered to remove content identical and equivalent to that found illegal, also worldwide | Intellectual property in Outer Space: still in the twilight zone | International Copyright Law conference returns to London with an IPKat readers’ discount
Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week
Reviewed by Riana Harvey
on
Friday, November 01, 2019
Rating:
Reviewed by Riana Harvey
on
Friday, November 01, 2019
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
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: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html