Trade marks
SpicyIP blog looked at collective marks in India. According to the author’s research, collective marks in India are often registered without a thorough examination. As a result, many are not compliant with the requirements under Indian law.
IP Helpdesk Blog considered a recent lawsuit for alleged copyright infringement, filed by Tintin’s right holders against Peppone, an artist who recreates famous characters in sculptures. In the same post, a new decision in the series of Banksy trade mark cancellation cases is also addressed [also see comments by The IPKat here and here].
Patents
Foss Patents discussed the recent amendments to the German patent law, with respect of injunctive relief. FOSS Patents provided its perspective on the reform, with a specific focus on whether it will affect the enforcement of Standard Essential Patents (SEP).
Kluwer Patent Blog featured an interview with Kevin Mooney, one of the movers behind the Unified Patent Court (UPC), concerning the UPC’s fate in light of the constitutional challenge in Germany. Mooney explained why he thinks the current constitutional challenge will not delay Germany’s ratification as much, as the previous constitutional challenge did [also see The IPKat’s earlier comments here and here].
Other
Class 46 blog offered a book review of “Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Africa” (ed. M. Schneider, V. Ferguson). The post praises the book for its comprehensive overview of both factual and legal background of intellectual property norms in each of the countries in the African continent.
FIDE Fundación shared “The Role of IP in a Post-Crisis World”. The report includes a detailed overview of the 12 conferences held last year as part of the Global Digital Encounters initiatives. It covers topics such as international IP and access to arbitration, the future of geographical indications and traceability, and the IP implications for the COVID-19 vaccine race.
Around the IP Blogs
Reviewed by Anastasiia Kyrylenko
on
Wednesday, June 16, 2021
Rating:
Reviewed by Anastasiia Kyrylenko
on
Wednesday, June 16, 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