Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!

Here’s the weekly roundup of all the news and stories you might have missed from the IPKat.

Trade marks 
Image via Pexels

Marcel Pemsel discussed the challenges linked to the registration of 3D trademark in the European Union, especially in relation to the recent application made by Wajos and the recent EUIPO Judgement in case T-10/22.

Katfriend Theodora Goula considered EU trade mark protection system in the case of second-hand fashion by analysing the application of exhaustion rights and the impact of de-branding and repackaging second-hand goods. Lastly, the post considers counterfeit second-hand goods. 


Chijioke Okorie reported on the recent South African High Court ruling, namely Mdlestshe and Another v YouTube Channel and Another, on the issue of copyright infringement on digital streaming platforms. 


Rose Hughes analysed the risks and the controversy over amending the description of a patent claim in accordance with the 2021 EPO Guidelines for Examination. In particular, the post considers the most recent case related to the application for a modified antibody constant region. 

Katfriend Vincente Zafrilla discussed the recent decision of the High Court of Delhi in relation to whether the CCI can intervene to define reasonable patents royalties on the basis of the Indian Competition Act.
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Chiara Gallo on Monday, July 31, 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.