 |
| This Kat is busy thinking up New Year's Resolutions |
Welcome to another - this time rather international - weekly look around the IP blogs.
Copyright
The debate about academic publishing and access has taken a turn in India, with Elsevier, Wiley, and American Chemical Society filing a copyright infringement suit in the Delhi High Court, seeking injunctions against Sci-Hub and LibGen (two sites which host unauthorised, free copies of academic works). SpicyIP has a three-part post about this litigation here, here, and here, as well as a separate post considering the Indian constitutional implications.
Patents
At the turn of the year, many of us like to take a Janus-faced look forward to the year to come while summarising the one past. Over on the IP Watchdog, there's both a look back at their view of the most significant patent developments of 2020 (here) and a set of predictions of what 2021 has in store for intellectual property (here).
Does the inclusion of one inflexible element mean that the entire device can no longer be described as 'flexible'? This was the question faced by the US Federal Circuit when considering an infringement suit concerning a 'flexible toothbrush' (which nevertheless didn't have a bendy head, for perhaps obvious reasons), according to PatentlyO's report.
Trade Marks
Some lucky Kat readers might have received a Birkin for Christmas; Hermes itself received the festive gift of prevailing in the Japan IP High Court against an appeal brought by Tia Maria, the maker of 'lookalike' bags, as summarised by The Fashion Law.
The Kluwer Trademark Blog published a summary of CJEU judgments in trade mark appeals in 2020, crunching some of the numbers and observing that no appeals have been allowed since May 2019 - suggesting that the hurdle that the case must raise an issue of significance to wider EU law to be admissible is high indeed.
Image: 'The cat at play', Henriëtte Ronner (Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam)
Reviewed by Sophie Corke
on
Sunday, January 10, 2021
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