Around the IP Blogs


Before we get ready to leave 2020 behind, let's have a look at what happened in the IP world the past week...

It was a loooong year...


A recent decision of the CJEU in a patent-related matter questions the former common understanding in Hungary: requesting an interim injunction for trademark infringement comes with a risk. Kluwer Trademark Blog reported on the case of Bayer v Richter/Exeltis which seems to change this understanding.


The German Bundesrat approved the Unified Patent Court Agreement and its Protocol on Provisional Application (PPA). To complete the German ratification procedure, the bills will have to be signed by the government and Bundespräsident and published in the Federal Law Gazette. Kluwer Patent Blog informed us of the German Bundesrat’s approval of the ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement.


In the second half of the year 2019, FRAND litigation was marked by several rejections of anti-suit injunctions when invoked.  Quickly we talked about “anti anti-suit injunctions” or “AASIs”. Although these AASIs are sometimes criticized, it seems that arguments in their favor should, most of the time, prevail. Kluwer Patent Blog explained the use of anti anti-suit injunctions.


On December 14, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a decision of the United States District Court for the Central District of California in Adaptive Streaming Inc. v. Netflix, Inc., holding that claims of Adaptive Streaming Inc.’s patent were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. IPWatchdog reported on the case.


India, through its Ambassador and Permanent Representative at the WTO, delivered a short but strong statement at the WTO TRIPS General Council Meeting held between 16-18th December on the on-going TRIPS waiver proposal. SpicyIP reported on the statement.



MARQUES shared the latest information regarding Brexit and the end of the transition period on 31 December 2020. This information comes from the UK Intellectual Property Office, who should be contacted directly if there are any queries.


“Dura lex sed lex” (it’s harsh but it’s the law) is a principle that usually does not admit exceptions. Unless of course, one can make recourse to the “restitutio in integrum”, which, however, is a remedy not so easily obtainable, save perhaps around Christmas, as shown in the decision by the General Court in Forbo Financial Services AG, v. EUIPO. Kluwer Trademark Blog reported on the case.



The impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on intellectual property (IP) law undoubtedly ranks as one of the most-discussed topics of 2020 among legal academics and practitioners. On 25 November 2020 the European Commission published a commissioned study on challenges posed by AI to the European IP rights framework. The study examines the state of the art of copyright and patent protection in Europe for AI-assisted outputs. Kluwer Copyright Blog reported on the study.

Around the IP Blogs Around the IP Blogs Reviewed by Magdaleen Jooste on Wednesday, December 23, 2020 Rating: 5

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:

Powered by Blogger.