 |
| This Kat is getting cabin fever |
Patents
Kluwer Patent Blog has reported on the patent implications of the German government's amendments to the German Act on the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases in Humans.
Still with reference to Germany, EP Law has commented on a recent decision of the Higher Regional Court of Munich on the hot topic of the requirements for the grant of a preliminary injunction in patent litigation.
Moving across the pond, Written Description hosted commentary on whether the strongly negative public reaction to Gilead's (now-dropped) orphan designation request for the use of remdesivir to treat COVID-19 was entirely warranted (including a response to reader comments on the original post).
IP Watchdog considered a recent decision of the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to offer the prospect of a rather clearer patent thicket in relation to generic versions of pharmaceutical drugs, as it indicates that antitrust liability may lie where a company 'over-lists' patents.
Trade Marks
The Fashion Law reports that even at a time of economic uncertainty, counterfeiters are finding ways to capitalise on the crisis.
Spicy IP indicates that India has now seen its first coronavirus-related IP dispute: a comparative advertising clash between Hindustan Unilever and Reckitt Benckiser, the maker of Dettol.
Copyright
CREATe at the University of Glasgow has announced new resources on platform regulation, following its launch event with BIICL back in February 2020.
General Corona-Content
IP Draughts has published a draft open letter which it would like the UK IP Minister to issue, on the subject of whether innovative means of addressing COVID-19-related shortages and requirements infringes the IP rights of others.
Finally, and on a much more positive note, the Copyright Alliance has published a post thanking creators for their efforts in providing content which we can all enjoy from home.
Cat Credit: Anya Allen
Around the Blogs
Reviewed by Sophie Corke
on
Friday, April 03, 2020
Rating:
Reviewed by Sophie Corke
on
Friday, April 03, 2020
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