Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week

This Kat finds IP riveting

No matter when you get round to it, it's never too late to catch up with the IPKat.


Ahead of the DSM Directive transposition deadline of 7 June, PermaKat Eleonora Rosati reported on the key highlights of the European Commission's newly-issued Guidance on the application of Article 17. 

Katfriends Fabio Ghiretti and Francesca Milani (both Mondini Bonora Ginevra) explained the Rome Court of First Instance's approach to copyright protection of fictional characters in a recent decision concerning Western films, “A Fistful of Dollars”, and “Rango”.


GuestKat Rose Hughes reflected on the meaning of provisions provided for the definition of an antibody by reference to a deposited hybridoma in the new antibody-specific section of the latest EPO Guidelines for Examination, in light of the recent Board of Appeal decision in T 0032/17.


InternKat Anastasiia Kyrylenko reviewed “The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Intellectual Property and Trade in the Pacific Rim”, by Matthew Rimmer (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020, 616 pp), recommending it not only to  researchers and policy-makers involved in international IP norm-setting via trade agreements, but also to anyone taking a political science perspective on trade agreements. 

Never Too Late 318 [week ending 30 May]: BREAKING: Oral proceedings in G1/21 (ViCo) rescheduled due to procedural technicality | [Guest Post] Repeat filings after Monopoly: an exchange of views | [Guest post] De minimis uses and the German implementation of Art 17 DSM Directive | Book Review: The Routledge Handbook of EU Copyright Law

Never Too Late 317 [week ending 23 May]: EPO responds to accusations of perceived bias in G1/21 (ViCo oral proceedings) | [Guest post] The TRIPS Waiver Debate: Why, and where to from here? | English Court of Appeal tightened requirement for Crown use defence to apply, so when will it? | Does the Irish Court of Appeal in Merck v Clonmel part ways from the CJEU's Santen Article 3(d) decision? | Keeping up with Dutch patent litigation: second half-year case law review 2020 | How playlists are changing the nature of musical works | Long walk to copyright reform (Pt 2): South Africa’s National Assembly rescinds its decision to pass the Copyright Amendment Bill | Let not the Cancellation Division see your black and deep desires: (another) Banksy mark cancelled by EUIPO due to bad faith | Can a trade mark become misleading because it is transferred to a new owner? It’s all a matter of tradition | [Breaking News] The Digital Scholarship Institute is launching its activities 

Image by DanaTentis from Pixabay
Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Never Too Late: if you missed the IPKat last week Reviewed by Sophie Corke on Friday, June 11, 2021 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.