Here comes your one-stop shop in the exciting world of the IP blogosphere!
 |
| An optimistic cat |
Patents
Following the EPO and the UKIPO, the USPTO has also rejected the DABUS application for a patent [the IPKat reported on the EPO’s refusal to grant a patent to an AI-inventor here]. Patently-O and Lexology briefly commented on the rationale behind the USPTO decision.
The Group of Experts on Standard Essential Patents, appointed by the European Commission in 2018, will soon release its report on licensing and valuation of SEPs. Last week, Kluwer Patent Blog discussed which points should be addressed in the Report, covering all stages of the standardization process.
Trade marks
Legalshift continued its series on Ukrainian case-law concerning trade mark infringement on the Internet. This most recent post covers cases in which trade marks are used in domain names, on social networks and even as favicons (had to google this last one).
Copyright
Julia Reda, ex-MEP and an active opponent of the EU copyright reforms, covered three recent decisions from the German Federal Supreme Court for the Kluwer Copyright Blog [one of them, Pelham, is also analysed by the IPKat here]. All three were the subject of preliminary rulings (C‑469/17, C‑516/17 and C‑476/17), delivered by the CJEU last year and extensively discussed [see IPKat’s posts here, here and here]. In Funke Medien and Spiegel Online, the Bundesgerichtshof confirmed that the German press had lawfully published military reports and a book chapter, respectively, as both cases fell under the exception for reporting of current events by the press. The sampling dispute in the Pelham case has been referred back to the regional court of appeal.
After Bella, Gigi and Kendall, paparazzi-filed infringement lawsuits continue. This time it is against the fashion house Fendi, for its failure to secure a license when posting on Instagram a paparazzi’s picture of Blake Lively wearing their outfit. TheFashionLaw briefly reported on this lawsuit, filed by Eva’s Photography against Fendi.
Other issues
SpicyIP featured a guest post by Neha Mishra on cross-border data flows under the guidelines of the WTO. Most international trade agreements are not suited to address issues arising from cross-border data flows. Mishra looked into how a flexible reading of the WTO General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) would enable the WTO to better align itself with principles of internet openness, privacy and security.
Around the IP blogs
Reviewed by Anastasiia Kyrylenko
on
Sunday, May 10, 2020
Rating:
Reviewed by Anastasiia Kyrylenko
on
Sunday, May 10, 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