Last week the Kats brought us news from the IP world. Here's an overview of the news...
 |
| Bring on the news! |
PATENTS
New essential information was released
for UK patent exam candidates. Following the trial of the PEBX system last
week, the PEB has now released an updated version of the Essential Information
for candidates. Rose Hughes reported on the information.
TRADE MARKS
Bad faith registration of a trademark
can cut a broad evidentiary swathe. Katfriend Aaron Thng discussed a recent
decision in Singapore that reminds us how expansive the claim can be in the
context of a successful opposition.
BOOK REVIEW
In “Copyright’s Arc”, Martin Skladany describes
copyright as a global force, which is nevertheless governed by territorial laws
and affected by national or regional dynamics. Sophie Corke provided a teaser of
the book, which includes a brief overview of Martin Skladany’s view on copyright
policy.
Marcus Müller and Cees Mulder’s, “Proceedings before the European Patent Office. A Practical Guide to Success in Opposition and Appeal” is published under the Elgar Practical Guides series (2020). It constitutes a very practical, clear and hands-on guide on EPO proceedings directed to the experienced patent attorney due to its reference to important (and current) case-law as well as to its references to the 2020 Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal. Frantzeska Papadopoulou provided an overview of this book.
COPYRIGHT
In a recent Russian Supreme Court
decision, a decision was made on the presumption of authorship v the deposit of the work. Katfriend Konstantin Voropaev reported on the decision.
Back in May, Chijioke Okorie started
the Beijing Treaty in Africa series. This Kat now visit Angola and Benin to
find out if any of the 2 countries have signed and/or ratified/acceded to the
Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances (“Beijing Treaty”); if so, to review
the law or draft bill (if any) that implements or domesticates the Treaty; and
if not, to establish if there are plans to do so.
Are the character traits of Sherlock
Holmes protected by intellectual property? Katfriend John Shaw looked at the
legal issues recently arisen around Netflix's Enola Holmes.
OTHER IP TOPICS: CHINA JUDGMENTS ONLINE
IPKat readers may know the website
China Judgements Online (CJO), in Chinese: 裁判文书网, an official platform where China courts'
decisions are published. A recent report from the Supreme People’s Court of
China (SPC) shows that, at 18:00 on 30 August 2020, the total number of
judicial adjudicative documents disclosed at the CJO had exceeded 100 million,
with nearly 48 billion visits. Tian Lu presented a brief introduction to the
handy and informative MUST-HAVE website for those who are interested in China’s
judicial system or certain specific cases.
Reviewed by Magdaleen Jooste
on
Sunday, October 11, 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