Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

Have you been keeping on top of IPKat news? In this week's edition of Never Too Late, we catch you up on a week dominated by trade mark reports, as well as other IP updates - shall we get started? 

Monday, Monday... No time to sleep on a Monday

In this guest contribution, Ilaria Gargiulo (DGRS Studio Legal) discusses a recent decision of an Italian court, illustrating that, even for iconic photographs, fulfilling the originality requirement for copyright protection is not necessarily a given.


Kat Annsley Merelle Ward reports on the recent announcement that IPEC claims can now be issued and heard outside of London, as the IP small claims track reaches courts in Newcastle, Manchester, Cardiff and beyond.

Trade Marks

Katfriend Tyrone Berger reports on a recent case addressing the ever-vexing question of when use amounts to trade mark use in Australia. In Pinnacle Runway Pty Ltd v Triangl Ltd, the Australian Federal Court found that the name given to a style of bikini will not amount to ‘use as a trade mark’ so as to constitute trade mark use.

InternKat Riana Harvey examines a recent High Court of England and Wales ruling, in which it was found that Bentley Motors had infringed a small family-run clothing firm’s ‘Bentley’ trade marks through the use of its ‘Combination Sign’.

In “Weel done, Cutty-Sark” - - from poem to sailing ship to whisky: What’s in a name?, Kat Neil Wilkof recalls the singular journey of the term “cutty sark”, which ultimately became the name of a brand of popular Scottish whiskey.

GuestKat Nedim Malovic reports on a decision of the Turin Court of First Instance, where Ferrero succeeded in defending its trade mark registrations for its 3D Tic Tac container.

When it comes to trade marks, in order to be irreplaceable, one must always be different - this is what Katfriend John Shaw sets out in his analysis of the latest trade mark dispute between Chanel and Catherine Sidonio.

Freedom of expression and confidentiality

Kat Eleonora Rosati looks at the intriguing case of Herbay v Hungary, Appl. No. 11608/15, which discussed Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, and how contractual restrictions on employees' free speech may be overcome by overriding fundamental rights considerations.

Never Too Late 240 [Week ending 10 NovThe Fruits of the Forbidden Tree - AG Opinion C-176/18 on the Boundaries of Plant Variety Rights | Book Review: Internet intermediaries and trade mark rights | case number and official translation of recent Swedish copyright referral now available | [Guest post] Event report: #FashionLawLDN - The Autumn Winter Review | Around the IP Blogs | Book Review: Global Genes, Local Concerns | BREAKING: Board of Appeal provides some initial thoughts on the Broad Institute’s CRISPR appeal (T0844/18) | ‘Competition Law in the Pharmaceutical Sector’ returns to Brussels with IPKat discount code | Thursday Thingies | OxFirst’s 4th Symposium on IP and Competition shows the need to conceptualize FRAND internationally | Sublicensing considerations in software contracts | Discussion point: Does processing of SaaS login credentials make you a data controller? | Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week | BREAKING: High Court of England and Wales weighs in on communication to the public and linking | A case for our times: Ambiguity, insufficiency and uncertainty (Anan Kasei v Neo [2019] EWCA Civ 1646) | What was the relevant undertaking? Further comments on Unilever v Shanks [2019] UKSC 45 | Benelux Court of Justice rules on well-known trade mark in a work of art | Michael Palmedo named Shamnad Basheer IP/Trade Fellow | China introduces new regulation tackling bad faith trade marks… and who is Jing Hanqing? | No economic links, no exhaustion of the “Schweppes” mark in Spain | Rolling to a stop - Jaguar Land Rover shape trade mark rejected, this time by the UKIPO | [Guest Post] Novelty of Cripps Pink Apples under Council Regulation on Community Plant Variety Rights | Conference Report: “Artificial Intelligence: Challenges for Intellectual Property Law” | Airbnb rentals and communication to the public: do you need a specific licence for your TV/radio sets? | Book launch: “The Confusion Test in European Trade Mark Law” | Call to readers: let’s talk about patent quality | Can the UK become and stay a member of the UPC? | Feilin v. Baidu: Beijing Internet Court tackles protection of AI/software-generated work and holds that copyright only vests in works by human authors

Never Too Late 239 [Week ending 27 October] Guest Post: Martin v Kogan: Court of Appeal clarifies joint authorship test | BREAKING: UKSC finds Unilever is not too big to pay - Shanks v Unilever [2019] UKSC 45 | Around the IP Blogs | General Court says that relevant public's attention is 'average at best' when assessing likelihood of confusion relating to games and computer games (so that DUNGEONS is confusingly similar to DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS) | [Guest Post] IP Education Series #2 | [Guest Post] Retromark Volume VI: the last six months in trade marks | The African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO) Model Law on Copyright and Related Rights | A twist (with apologies to Chubby Checker) in the music business when public transportation is involved | General Court confirms cancellation of EU trade mark consisting of the shape of famous Rubik's Cube | How and where may implementers sue for FRAND-licences? | Event report: Tertulia on EUIPO Boards of Appeal Case Law | Book Review: Translation Accuracy and Dissemination of Disclosure of Patent Information: An Analysis of Translation and its Influence on Patent Law | Never Too Late | AG Kokott provides insights on distinctive character of geogaphical collective trade marks and their interplay with GIs
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 Monday, November 18, 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.