 |
| This Kat is having a lazy Sunday |
Copyright
The Kluwer Copyright Blog hosted a discussion of remixing and remastering music according to US copyright law following the recent US District Court for the Central District of California decision in Arty v. Marshmello.
CREATe (University of Glasgow) published a discussion and review of empirical evidence regarding 'optimality versus reality' in the setting of copyright terms internationally.
Also from CREATe, and ideally for Kats seeking to unwind in the sun, came a roundup of recent IP scholarship to add to one's summer reading list.
The future of journalism has become a hotly contested topic around the world, with Prof. Michael Geist summarising his appearance before the Canadian Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications as part of its study on Bill S-225, where he opposed the proposal to increase copyright enforcement as a means of addressing the media's challenges.
Patent
The IP Watchdog considered the applicability of AI-based SEP prediction models to the valuation and determination of essentiality of SEPs, supporting their use in certain use cases to support expert opinion.
FOSS Patents reported on changes afoot at the Munich Regional Court, where, thanks to the promotion of Dr. Georg Werner to Presiding Judge, consistency is likely to be furthered and there is even the possibility that a third patent litigation division will be created.
Other
In a guest post from Pedro Matheus and Leonardo Cordeiro (Gruenbaum, Possinhas & Teixeira), IPTango discussed the Brazilian Supreme Court's definition of the effect of a decision which declared Art.40 of the Industrial Property Law of Brazil to be unconstitutional.
Reviewed by Sophie Corke
on
Sunday, June 27, 2021
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[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)
![[UPCKat] UPC Court of Appeal confirms that opt-outs may be withdrawn for patents subject to pre-UPC national litigation](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpmrXJ0cC3SxOoivC5ULhM28pQmX9tykkfzReC-ZaHlNPANbFKM6qY-jGJUpJbI6VWkoJH2kL867Uqs-KAOosZHW-Voz25uAZwOw2RUO65FeTgLEbGFtTAq6tQ-9-uzLRW4oHj1EcMR2xqvSOVOXN2BSRYuMJvTGXub5Htcij5mAgo2HX2M90LXA/s72-c/cat%20opt%20out.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