Around the IP Blogs

February is finally here, Mercury retrograde is over and we can finally breathe lightly! Take this opportunity not only to renew your energies but also to check what has been going on around the IP blogs.

A Kat relaxing after a long January


The Kluwer Copyright Blog published a handful of interesting posts over the past few days: (i) a summary of and comment to a decision of the Dutch Supreme Court, which held that DJs should also be considered phonogram producers in a case involving a famous DJ and his record label; (ii) a two-part analysis of the interface between copyright and football games (part I, part II), which covered the possible protection of rules and other aspects of a match through copyright; (iii) a summary of and comment to the English High Court decision on misuse of private information and copyright infringement in a letter written by the Duchess of Sussex.

The IPWatchdog published an article discussing controversial aspects of state compulsory ebook and audiobook licensing from a legal and policy perspective, bearing in mind the supremacy of the US Copyright Act over state laws.


Marques Class 99 reported on the UKIPO's recently launched call for views on the design system. The call for views was also reported by The IPKat and can be read here

The Legal-Patent blog summarised a recent decision of the CJEU in a dispute involving two grill bowl designs: the GRILL BOWL Community design was challenged in its individual character because of an older national grill bowl design – submitted as a patent specification. 


IPFinance published an article on the USPTO's new patent search tool, which features a series of improvements on the previous version. 

PatentlyO posted on the US Utility Patent Applications Allowance Rate followed by a quick analysis of the results.

The European Patent Office published its 2022 Guidelines for Examination and the Kluwer Patent Blog prepared a post with the 4 main changes in the new version of the guidelines. 

Trade Marks

PatentlyO reported on a recent rejection by the Federal Circuit of gTLD's trademark registration for .SUCKS

The TTABlog published reports on two interesting decisions (i) the first was a decision of the USPTO regarding two trade marks in classes 30, 35 and 40 and considered the risk of confusion between the rejected mark and the CRC Kosher Certification Mark; (ii) the second was a decision of the United States District Court for the District of Oregon reversing a USPTO Board's decision which had dismissed an opposition to registration of the mark MANIMAL for a wide variety of clothing, including "children’s clothing."

Should commonly used phrases or descriptions be protected by trade marks? (No.) That was the question posed by the Likelihood of Confusion blog in a comment to a lawsuit involving the registered trade mark "thick n juicy".


The Kluwer Trademark Blog published an article on the recent clarification by the Hungarian Supreme Court of the rules for the revision of second instance decisions regarding the validity of intellectual property rights. 

FOSS Patents brought a thought-provoking article about competition law issues arising from the recent discussion about Apple's compliance (or non-compliance) with a Dutch competition ruling - with Apple now saying that it will charge a 27% commission on payments made through alternative payment systems.

Around the IP Blogs Around the IP Blogs Reviewed by Alexandre Miura on Sunday, February 06, 2022 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.