 |
| Enjoying the last bit of Sunday... |
Patents
The German Federal Court of Justice upheld a European patent for paper technology owned by packaging solutions provider Ranpak. The dispute, which has been ongoing since 2015, is with Sprick GmbH Bielefelder Papier. JUVE Patent reported on the judgement.
In the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal in Neurim v Mylan, the Court of Appeal has dismissed Neurim’s appeal against the rejection of its application for a preliminary injunction. Kluwer Patent Blog reported on the judgement.
The provisional application period of the Unified Patent Court Agreement can start before the end of this year. That is the expectation of Winfried Tilmann, consultant at Hogan Lovells and one of the founders of the court. Kluwer Patent Blog interviewed Tilmann and reported on the interview.
The many opportunities provided by managing patents under an open innovation paradigm have so far not found the attention they deserve among the patent community. Kluwer Patent Blog provided insight into managing IP under and Open Innovation Perspective.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision that certain claims of Nike, Inc.’s U.S. Patent Nos. 7,814,598 and 8,266,749 are not obvious. The Court also disagreed with Nike’s argument that Adidas did not have standing to appeal because it could not prove that it had an “injury in fact”. IPWatchdog reported on the judgement.
Trademarks
The “I Love New York” logo design is so ubiquitous that many believe that it resides squarely in the public domain for any/all to use. As it turns out, that is not the case. The logo is a registered trade mark, owned by the New York State Department of Economic Development. TheFashionLaw shared some of the history of the trademark, including its origin.
Copyright
Copyright infringement through social media – one of the results of lockdown in India. A national Indian daily newspaper published a news article stating that sharing PDF copies of an e-newspaper on messaging apps is illegal and that group admins and individuals can be held liable for unauthorized circulation. IPWatchdog looked at the implications for copyright and contractual violations in such unauthorised circulation of newspapers.
Other: CHIPS Act
The Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors Act (CHIPS Act) has been introduced in Congress to reinvigorate U.S. chip manufacturing and innovation. The CHIPS Act pushes chip manufacturing back to the United States due of national security concerns. IP finance reported on the main provisions of the CHIPS Act.
Around the IP Blogs
Reviewed by Magdaleen Jooste
on
Sunday, July 05, 2020
Rating:
Reviewed by Magdaleen Jooste
on
Sunday, July 05, 2020
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] Asking ourselves ‘Y’ – Are shape marks shaping complex products’ aftermarkets?](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHwE0es_m0lzJpedp0KFtKOYBne_M3YPJ-qwQxiY_YMkHffLAAXkSW9F-pjQFKsy5kJJ-VWScQQkuEVb5-BxnDv10XIMAbYhvgzBSQadD1gdTiIjg9-Oj9Iekll-C3Ca9I76uI3Hh5nCI4QyLosLSNev9VzLq9lF1jM86ungheEDOBKLzGTbE3yw/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Flat rates supported by clauses on universality of repertoire in contracts between CMOs and users are anti-competitive, says Spanish Competition Authority](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpBg7o3d7DPzH4YqNz3DUV5J5_sS4P7X7ZznFNETyQlLe0gonaSi3eE_jdjHD_aIjbPKhgpvUrkg6tPprYQYdwDGiyuWIXty9BOUlc07wUVbjDxI1bHoVxZA0ZCC9HBPjLXQwUioBSd9e9n-Z3uCeJ9UUgEvtJHLo1AllR20HGJETFdKoovxLBMw/s72-c/images.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