This Kat is taking a moment to smell the flowers |
Copyright
The Kluwer Copyright Blog published a summary of Article 17-related developments in the past year, which may be of interest to Kat readers keeping an eye on the CDSM Directive.
In relation to a copyright infringement suit filed before the District Court, Trivandrum, against Facebook India, which also alleges violation of moral and posthumous celebrity rights, Spicy IP considered the various factors at play before the court.
Patents
The biggest news in the patent blogosphere last week was the German Federal Constitutional Court's decision rejecting all outstanding constitutional complaints against the proposed Unified Patent Court, removing a major hurdle to the initiative's realisation. See coverage on FOSS Patents, JUVE Patent, Legal Patent, and the Kluwer Patent Blog - and, of course, the IPKat - for more.
Over on Comparative Patent Remedies, Thomas Cotter commented on the UK Supreme Court's recent "well-reasoned" decision in Secretary of State for Health v. Servier Laboratories Ltd. [2021] UKSC 24, concerning a claim for damages after the revocation of a pharmaceutical patent which had allegedly been obtained on the basis of false representations.
Writing from Munich, this Kat was interested to see JUVE Patent's report that the Munich Regional Court is now challenging better-established patent courts such as Düsseldorf, with its recent increase in cases bucking a declining trend elsewhere in Germany.
Trade marks
In the first judgment on sound marks at EU level since their introduction in 2017, the General Court deemed the sound mark 'tin plop' (Dosen Plopp) to be devoid of distinctive character, in line with the opinions of both the original trademark office decision and the Board of Appeal, with Legal Patent providing a summary of the issues at hand.
Timberland has been producing its iconic boots for nearly fifty years, attempting however only in the past several years to acquire trade dress protection for the design in the US. PatentlyO provided an overview of the company's latest lawsuit at district court level.
Other
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