Around the IP blogs

Here comes the latest review (and the maiden contribution by this new IPKat Intern!) of the IP blogosphere.

You're in for a treat

Trade Marks

The first sound mark case has already reached Luxembourg and Intellectuals summarizes what has so far transpired in this case (mainly, the EUIPO BoA saying that a sound resembling that which can be heard when a can of carbonated drink is opened is not distinctive). 

WIPR reports a recent trade mark opposition case between the Catalan broadcaster “TV3” and the EU TM application “LaTV3D”. Last week, the General Court overturned the EUIPO decision to register “LaTV3D”, finding a likelihood of confusion for Class 38 “Telecommunication services”, but allowing the “LaTV3D” registration for “translation and interpretation”. 

The Fashion Law has updated its 2018 post on registering a single colour as a trademark. The usual robin’s egg blue and a certain shoe’s red sole are in the highlight!

While Tuesday is a little bit too early for an aperitivo, you can start the week reading about two Italian “APERITIVO” trade marks, brought to you by Marques. The main issue in the controversy: how wide is the scope of protection for trade marks with a low level of distinctiveness?

Artificial intellegence

In the JIPLP blog, Heidi Härkönen advances her thoughts on how artificial intelligence is affecting the fashion industry. Because the copyright system rests on the existence of a human creator, AI-generated designs would not be eligible for IP protection and immediately fall into the public domain. This, in turn, might affect the fashion industry, relying on IP for protecting their latest trends. 


WIPR reports on a recent patent infringement case between Sonos and Google. The US International Trade Commission –responsible for patent and trade mark infringement cases involving goods being imported into to the US– will investigate alleged infringement of Sonos’ patents in smart speakers imported by Google, including in Google Chromecast Audio and Google Home. 

Comparative Patent Remedies shares with us not only the Guidelines for FRAND disputes, recently published by the Munich I Regional Court, but also a link to their unofficial English translation (since not all of us are germanophones).

From across the pond, Eric Goldman reviews the recent Bell v. Chicago Cubs case regarding whether a retweet can be considered copyright infringement. Spoiler alert: it cannot; otherwise “the world will burn up in a fiery ball of copyright lawsuits against retweeters”, says the author.
Around the IP blogs Around the IP blogs Reviewed by Anastasiia Kyrylenko on Tuesday, February 11, 2020 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.