In case C-264/09, the Court of Justice interpreted the notion of ‘address’, as used in Art. 8(2)(a) of the 2004/48/EC Directive. Eleonora Rosati looked into this ruling, following her previous analysis of the Advocate’s General opinion. Although the CJEU considers that IP addresses and email address do not fall within the notion of ‘address’, Eleonora disagrees with such interpretation, arguing that this results corresponds neither with the everyday meaning of the term, nor to the overarching objectives of the 2004/48/EC Directive.
Kat Friends Peter Georg Picht and Erik Habich provided their thoughts on the Sisvel v. Haier case, handed down by the German Federal Supreme Court [also see Katposts here and here]. This decision, although generally in line with the CJEU’s approach in C-170/13, introduces new elements to the German approach to Standard Essential Patents (SEP) and to FRAND licensing.
Kat Friend Hugh Stephens took the journey into the history of Anglo-US copyright wars of the 19th century and their impact on the development Canadian literature (with Canada then being part of the British Empire). Tensions between British publishers and Canadian printers went so far, that Mark Twain famously said that all Canadians are born pirates. The disparities regarding the copyright protection afforded to foreign authors on the North American continent were only resolved with the signature of the Berne Convention by the British Empire and thereafter a bilateral copyright treaty between the British Empire and the US.
Former Guest Kat Valentina Torelli shared her analysis of the recent decision of the EU General Court in case T-100/19. The case revolves around the validity of a Community design for a vehicle component, first attacked by a competing company in the EUIPO (without success) and then at the General Court. Most notably, the Court addressed whether the grounds of invalidity under Art. 25(1) of Regulation 6/2002 are indivisible.
Kat Friend Roosa Tarkiainen looked into the antitrust investigation, opened by the European Commission, against the Apple App Store. The investigation under Arts. 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union will focus on the Apple´s App Store’s set of rules for app distributors. This formal investigation was launched after a complaint from the rival music streaming service Spotify.
Last week, the IPKat featured two (online) event reports: the first on the Virtual Fashion Law Update, provided by Kat Friend Gemma Louise Nimmo; and the second on the IBIL “IP Law, Policy and Practice” conference, authored by Kat Friend Duncan Bull. Be sure to regularly check our “Forthcoming events” list so as not to miss any future conferences.
Never Too Late 272 [Week ending July 5] The Patent Examination Board (PEB) releases further information on the 2020 UK patent exams | How to deal with abusive patent enforcement within the EU enforcement framework | Breaking: US Supreme Court holds that "generic.com" marks are not necessarily generic - USPTO v. Booking.com | "Nosecco" appeal goes flat in the High Court | The CJEU Brompton Bicycle case: a UK view | When does a communication to the public under EU copyright law need to be to a ‘new public’? A new research article | The National Copyright Administration of China: no more ‘black hole drama’ in the image market | Book Review: 3D Trademarks and other Non-Traditional Trademarks | Amsterdam Court of Appeal issues dynamic blocking injunction in long-running dispute between BREIN and ISPs | IP Federation celebrates 100th birthday by fighting COVID-19 and improving social mobility | European Pharma Law Academy returning (online) with special IPKat readers’ discount | Swedish Patent and Market Court upholds Sweden’s first dynamic blocking injunction | [Guest Post] Privacy and Data Protection in Chinese Civil Code: First Clarification of Personal Data Protection from the Perspective of Civil Law in China
Never Too Late 271 [Week ending June 28] [Guest Post] These boots are made for walking...and not for copyright protection | Long walk to copyright reform: South Africa’s Copyright Amendment Bill is back to the National Assembly | Neurim v. Mylan: UK Court of Appeal denies interim injunction in face of a launch-at-risk, but are damages really adequate? | BREAKING: Kymab caught the mouse as sufficiency strengthened by UK Supreme Court in Regeneron battle ( UKSC 27) | When the consumer getting the mark all wrong might be good for the brand holder | [Guest post] Shaping the right form of (IP) protection: The Moon Boot decision(s) | [Guest post] Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal applies C-21/18 Textilis in long-running pillow fight | ECtHR finds Russian website blocking approach contrary to Article 10 ECHR (freedom of expression and information) | ‘Standards & Patents’ 3-day event returns in digital format, again with a special IPKat readers’ discount
Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Anastasiia Kyrylenko on Sunday, July 19, 2020 Rating: