Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

You know what time it is - time for this week’s edition of Never Too Late! 

I think we all know this feeling by now...

Hanne Kirk and her team at Gorrissen Federspiel (Denmark) provide a fascinating insight into the recent Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court ruling regarding the outer limits of copyright in an artwork. In this case, Danish artist 'Tal R' won an injunction against watchmakers planning to cut up one of his paintings. 


Following the Munich Regional Court's decision a few months ago to issue an (ex parte) injunction ordering the defendant to withdraw an anti-suit injunction filed in a US court (an thus an anti-anti-suit injunction), the Paris Court was asked to issue a similar injunction, ultimately granting an anti-anti-suit injunction in IPCom v. Lenovo. GuestKat Peter Ling reports on this interesting decision.

Richard Vary provides a guest contribution, in which he looks into the recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit, which overturned a decision issued in December 2017 by Judge Selna in the Central District of California, instead going to a jury trial.

Trade Marks

GuestKat Léon Dijkman looks at the recent Opinion of Advocate General Bobek in Primart Marek Łukasiewicz v. EUIPO (C-702/18), where he suggested that the possibility of submitting new arguments and evidence before the General Court in trade mark opposition proceedings could be broadened.

Katfriend Deborah Vincze provides a summary of the final implementation in France of Directive 2015/2436 on trade marks.

GuestKat Nedim Malovic examines a recent decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal,  which found likelihood of confusion between two figurative marks of whales on the basis of conceptual identity, despite some visual dissimilarities between the marks.

Kat Eleonora Rosati reports on the Opinion of Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona in Coty Germany v Amazon (C-567/18), in which he advised the CJEU to rule that Amazon might be potentially liable for trade mark infringement for stocking infringing goods.

Geographical indications

GuestKat Léon Dijkman looks at the judgment of the CJEU in Consorzio Tutela Aceto Balsamico di Modena v Balema GmbH (C-432/18), which ruled that "aceto" and "balsamico" are not individually protectable components of PGI "Aceto Balsamico di Modena".

Freedom of Expression and Hate Speech

SpecialKat Chijioke Okorie reports on the controversial "Hate Speech Bill" in Nigeria, which recently passed its second reading in the Nigerian Senate.

Mandatory mediation developments

Katfriend Marina Perraki summarises the just concluded legislative enactment in Greece to introduce a form of mandatory mediation, including with respect to IP infringement actions.

Conference Reports

Alina Trapova (Bocconi University) prepared a report on the recent 'More Than Just a Game' conference, held in Milan, discussing various topics such as content regulation, consumer protection, contracts and e-Sports.

In memoriam

Kat Neil Wilkof writes an 'In Memoriam' for D.C. Fontana, the creator of Mr. Spock from Star Trek.

Never Too Late 243 [Week ending 1 Dec] Common sense prevails in trade mark specification interpretation | Hold Your Colour - Cancellation Action against Nivea Blue withdrawn after 11-year Saga in Germany | Scotch-ing decision leaves a tart taste in Isetan's mouth | Crystal Head vodka 3D shape application: Who you gunna call?! | Kylie Minogue not so lucky in IPEC copyright infringement claim | When is Harvard not Harvard? | Chams Plc and another v Mastercard Asia/Pacific Pte Ltd and 5 Others - Where a contractual breach involves the misuse of IP-based confidential information | Copyright protection of fictional characters: is it possible? How far can it go? | Clarity is needed from the Boards of Appeal on the EPO's "co-applicant approach" to priority | Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week | Around the IP Blogs | 'Day day up' trade mark case and two English systems in China | The real reason why the "451-page dossier" should concern you: US seeks to put "UK deviation from the EPC" on the table in future US/UK trade negotiations

Never Too Late 242 [Week ending 24 Nov] Latest fashion law developments in a 1-day course ... with an IPKat readers special discount | Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week | Inventorship under the light of AI? | Tuesday Thingies | Economics and IP: the good, the bad and the ugly (and a request for reader feedback)? | Another "Glen", another GI violation- Hamburg Court considers "Glen Els" an Evocation of "Scotch Whisky" | Around the IP Blogs | BREAKING: German constitutional court Brexit-delay rumours are "bulls***" in on-going UPC saga | "Many are called but few are chose": When a claim of bad faith succeeded in a trademark matter in Singapore | [Guest Post] IP Education Series #3 | FRAND: OLG Karlsruhe rules on nature, extent and timing of obligations under Huawei v ZTE | JMLS IP Conference (Report 1): Antitrust, IP, data and FRAND - time for a retool? | Shifting the burden of proof back to the patentee (T 1299/15) | JMLS IP Conference (Report 2): Patent eligibility, anti-anti suits and the era of unpredictability | UCL IBIL Event: Boris v Corbyn v Trump - putting a price on patents, medicine and innovation | CJEU follows up on Soulier and Doke and rules that presumption of consent of performers in relation to exploitation of recordings is not necessarily contrary to EU law | GC excludes likelihood of confusion between marks representing stylised human figure and relating to same goods due to low distinctiveness of shared concept | Amsterdam district court orders Google to take offline fake reviews | [Guest post] Polish Constitutional Tribunal rules that right holders can claim damages amounting to twice a hypothetical licence fee in copyright infringement cases
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 Tuesday, December 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.