Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

Patents, copyright, event reports, defamation, IP Education Series… you say it, we’ve got it! The roundup of the variety of news that the IPKat covered last week has arrived… because it really is Never Too Late!

The recent update by the UKIPO of its Formalities Manual added that an AI inventor is not acceptable as it does not identify "a person" as required by law. In light of this, GuestKat Frantzeska Papadopoulou examines patent applications made by AI Inventor 'DABUS', and asks us to query the implications of this current view of excluding inventions created by AI.

German ratification of the Unitary Patent Court has been a long pending process, awaiting the outcome of a complaint in the German Constitutional Court. It has been suggested that Brexit has played a role in this. However, as GuestKat Rose Hughes reports, according to the judge overseeing the German constitutional complaint to the UPC (Justice Huber), these allegations may be bulls***.

In this guest report from Rien Broekstra and Gaëlle Béquet of Brinkhof (Amsterdam) (who represent Wiko in the parallel Dutch litigation), they detail the latest development in the ongoing FRAND wars, this time from Germany, concerning the requirements for a FRAND offer.

Typically, in disputes of insufficiency before the EPO, the burden of proof is initially on the side of the party alleging that the patent or application is insufficient. However, as GuestKat Rose Hughes notes, a recent Board of Appeal decision (T 1299/15) confirms it is possible for the burden of proof to shift back to the patentee if "serious doubts" exist.

Kat Eleonora Rosati reports on the CJEU judgment in Spedidam v INA, which followed up on Soulier and Doke and ruled that a presumption of consent of performers in relation to exploitation of recordings is not necessarily contrary to EU law.

Katfriend Bohdan Widła (Barta & Kalinski sp.j. and Jagiellonian University) provides an update on recent developments in Poland concerning damages for copyright infringement, and how much can be claimed.

Trade Marks
Katfriend Penelope Ng brings us a summary of a recent trade mark case in Singapore - Dentsply Sirony Inc. v Tomy Incorporated [2019] SGIPOS 13 - in which bad faith was successfully claimed.

GuestKat Nedim Malovic looks at the intriguing judgment of the EU General Court in T-149/19, which excluded likelihood of confusion between marks representing stylised human figures despite sharing the same public, considering the latter's average level of attention and the average degree of conceptual similarity between the signs.

Geographical Indications
GuestKat Peter Ling reports on a decision by the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg, which found that use of "Glen" in "Glen Els" constituted both an "evocation" of the protected denomination "Scottish Whisky" and a "misleading indication".

Looking to catch up with the latest fashion (law) trends? Kat Eleonora Rosati informed us of the next event 'Fashion Law London - The Spring/Summer Collection', to be held in London on Friday 28 February 2020. IPKat readers enjoy a discount in the registration fee as well!

Katfriend Amy Crouch (Simmons & Simmons, London) provided the first report on the 63rd UIC John Marshall Law School Annual IP Conference, on the topic of "Antitrust & IP: Does it need to be retooled?"Amy also reported on "The State of Patent Law & Policy: Views from the Top" session in her second report from the JMLS IP Conference.

In light of all of the political drama within the UK concerning the NHS, AmeriKat Annsley informed us of the UCL IBIL Innovation debate which took place a few days ago (chaired by Mr Justice Birss) where experts who understand the patent system, innovator and generic business models, drug pricing, cost of drug discovery and public health systems, explored some of the issues faced. 

GuestKat Léon Dijkman looks at an interesting decision from the Amsterdam district court which ordered Google to remove negative reviews from Google Maps's review section after concluding that they were fake.

Economics and IP
Former PermaKat Nicola Searle shares her thoughts on the current state of the impact of economics on IP, and as a bonus asks for feedback from Kat readers.

IP Education
The IP Education Series is back! In this week's instalment, Dr Janice Denoncourt discusses Generation Z, IP Education and the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals - in particular Goal 9: to build resilient infrastructure, promote sustainable industrialisation and foster innovation.

Never Too Late 241 [Week ending 17 Nov] It may be the name of a fashion style, but is it trade mark use? | Bentley Motors found you have infringed small clothing firm’s ‘Bentley’ trade marks | Monday Miscellany | “Weel done, Cutty-Sark”--from poem to sailing ship to whisky: What’s in a name? | IPEC no longer London-focuses as IP small claims track reaches courts in Newcastle, Manchester, Cardiff and beyond | Can an employee’s freedom of expression trump their confidentiality obligations? The ECtHR weighs in (in a case concerning an employee’s personal website) | Around the IP Blogs | Wednesday Whimsies | Ferrero succeeds in enforcing is rights in the Tic Tac container before Italian court | Never Too Late: If You Missed the IPKat | In order to be irreplaceable, one must always be different: Chanel in trade mark dispute over GABRIELLE mark - again | [Guest post] Rome court rules that iconic photograph of judges Falcone and Borsellino is not a photographic artwork 

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: if you missed the IPKat last week Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Riana Harvey on Thursday, November 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.