Although this Kat struggled to understand the mysterious energies from last week's moon eclipse, the stars and the planets have aligned to bring you the latest posts from the Katworld.
 |
| A Kat contemplating the complex beauty of the universe |
Adele has stolen the spotlight with her new album and also with a special request to Spotify to disable its shuffle button so that listeners could listen to the album the way the artist intended. InternKat Giorgio Luceri discussed these events under the lens of the moral right of integrity.
Skipping to the next track, SpecialKat Hayleigh Bosher brought an update on the current debate in the UK regarding the new Copyright Bill proposing new laws for equitable remuneration for streaming, contract adjustment, right of revocation, and transparency.
Patents
GuestKat Rose Hughes analysed a recent decision of the English High Court regarding the clinical formulation of Bayer's cancer drug, sorafenib. The High Court found that the drug was an obvious outcome of routine drug development.
Trade Marks
Katfriend Becky Knott analysed a recent decision from the General Court (GC), regarding a potential use and exploitation of the reputation of the Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) ‘Porto’ by the trade mark application "Portwo Gin", designating "Spirits [beverages]”. Spoiler: The GC considered that the referred application would exploit the reputation of the Porto PDO.
Miscellaneous
Guest Jan Jacobi investigated the limits of parody based on a pending case before the Dutch Supreme Court that involves the use of a look-a-like of a famous F1 racer in a commercial and whether it would constitute a potential infringement of his portrait/image rights.
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) published its annual World Intellectual Property Indicators Report, reviewing global IP activity in 2020. SpecialKat Tian Lu wrote a short summary of the report.
Part II of the review GuestKat Anastasiia Kyrylenko wrote for the book “Handbook of Intellectual Property Research” (ed. by I. Calboli and M. Montagnani, OUP, 912 pp.) is available now (you can check part I here).
Reviewed by Alexandre Miura
on
Friday, December 10, 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