Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week!

If you missed last week's posts, it's not too late to catch up.
A Kat enjoying Spring

Trade marks and GIs

Anastasiia Kyrylenko reflected on how wars affect geographical indications (GIs). Specifically, Anastasiia focused on the impact of World War I on the history of camembert, a French cheese.

Anna Maria Stein discussed relevant considerations for brand owners filing trade mark applications for environmentally friendly or sustainable goods and services.


Henry P Yang reported on the appellate judgment in Intex v Ericsson 2023:DHC:2243-DB issued by the Delhi High Court. This appeal was directed against the judgment of 13 March 2015 by Mr Justice Singh where he notably held that Ericsson had prima facie complied with its FRAND commitment, and that Intex was prima facie unwilling to execute a FRAND licence.

At the 30th Fordham IP Conference's session on Women in Patent Law, Annsley Merelle Ward presented the recent amendments to the Patents Court Guide to improve diversity in the Patents Court.
Rose Hugues commented on the decision in T 0758/20 issued by the Board of Appeal which confirmed that ViCo oral proceedings should be considered the "new gold standard".


GuestKat Dawid Sierzant reflected on the new rules on preliminary injunctions in IP cases that will come into effect in Poland on 1 July 2023.
Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week! Never too late: if you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot on Tuesday, April 18, 2023 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.