 |
| This Kat is enlightened |
With warmer temperatures ahead, it's time to look back on last week's developments from around the IP blogs.
Copyright
The buzz around non-fungible tokens (NFTs) in recent months continues unabated, with a post on the Kluwer Copyright Blog about the role of copyright law and their status under it.
CREATe (University of Glasgow) has published a new working paper on 'Art and Modern Copyright: the Contested Image', following up on its recent issuance of one on 'Copyright History in Review'.
Patents
The appointment of James Mellor as the next IP-specialist judge on England & Wales' High Court featured on JUVE Patent, which interviewed him about a range of issues including anti-suit injunctions and how hearings are being adapted in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
FOSS Patents reported on the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice's decision under Biden effectively to archive the Trump administration's stance on standard essential patent (SEP) enforcement, which had been expressed in an updated version of its 2015 Business Review Letter to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), a standards-setting organisation.
Over on the Kluwer Patent Blog, Matthieu Dhenne summarised a recent debate in France over whether compulsory licences should be granted in the interest of public health at times of acute crisis and if patents are indeed a key barrier to domestic vaccine production.
Trade marks
The TTABlog reported on the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit's decision to affirm a finding that VAGISAN is confusable with VAGISIL for female intimate care products, largely based on survey evidence.
SpicyIP explained the role of trademarks, packaging and visual impressions in generating customer loyalty, effectively as a means of extending de-facto monopolies over pharmaceutical products beyond the term of patent protection.
Whether Lil Nas X's "Satan Shoes" - 666 pairs of modified Nike Air Max '97s - would have been deemed a trade mark violation or a matter of free speech if not for the parties' settlement was considered on the IP Watchdog.
Photo by Felix Mittermeier via Pexels.
Around the IP Blogs
Reviewed by Sophie Corke
on
Sunday, April 25, 2021
Rating:
Reviewed by Sophie Corke
on
Sunday, April 25, 2021
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] Thou shalt not discriminate the Lego block over any other kind of product – GRUR speaks out on C-211/24](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWJYQUJNvYydrZcjwSHPuxd14xX3_48aBusHKBogY-Wg1BPSJSABbFFjmGiUV3aqG2npP9xYaIl1vtWK5AsqGOQPgRD2TWFLhyyc4xGm1fHDD-tt9kHcrSSgAyju2P9wSKz0VW6h7D5MD4Hxd9vREyxKYzlMRNXxxtxc3DiNsXppfVaxgSxAMV/s72-c/21742619125_7c9e53cd39_o.png)
![[Guest post] Comparison of wine and gin: the EUIPO’s unquestionable Similarity Tool](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNfTEBXiPVS0XjZi4mNE1OtXLxXiEp1PUgcUK7MMMXlfyTkO5SMXv-VCMXXNdS_F1XdMMxYca1VbBTGvvDeTVpo5x-5YwR7atQJmK3x32T8LACpf4308kht3nEtaxPwEPcGGrB0s5xjGktmQPOiVwPVLRO5JbW19qupc7xUtiVutvaWHow0OpBkA/s72-c/Picture%201.jpg)
![[Guest post] Muddying the waters of copyright – a rapid reaction to today’s IPEC decision which sees the sinking of the WaterRower’s claims for copyright protection](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7chFANC7ppmZl4_nlR6_hZEcg6cOhVEJNVXqki4p82BoVlcLFotuOXzHWYD5lKLiiK_kRoWeXmJjjaV2DpoKsAWq8U3LFioO5W_841a9gcfDIFjvZWcGqfnr0jWJNtyXptIYR_8bxCssaDkJ9KMokuSqy1g65Il7p2hPwo4MfRCEGoUPQJesvbg/s72-w400-c-h189/Screenshot%202024-11-11%20at%2018.20.45.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