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

While the New Year is approaching, let’s look back at what you might have missed last week.

Image by Riana Harvey

Rose Hughes discussed the recent Board of Appeal decision in T 2172/21, which highlights the inadequacy of mere lists of various features for satisfying the basic requirements in Europe.

Rose Hughes reviewed the EPO Boards of Appeal decisions and case law.

Henry P Yang reported on the breaking news of the UK Supreme Court’s confirmation that an inventor under the UK Patents Act 1977 must be a natural person.

Rose Hughes discussed the Board of Appeal decision in T 1989/19 in relation to the interpretation of the Enlarged Board of Appeal decision in G2/21.


Katfriend Despoina Dimitrakopoulou discussed the news of the reaction of the reggaeton mega-star Bad Bunny to the creation of a song called “NostalgIA” by using his voice among the ones of other artists.

Eleonora Rosati evaluated the conditions for works of applied art to be protected by copyright under EU law, by considering the referral made in the context of proceedings brought by the maker of a modular furniture system.

Trade marks

Alessandro Cerri reported on a recent Court of Appeal of England and Wales decision on trade marks that departed from EU case-law.

Marcel Pemsel reported on a recent decision from EUIPO’s board of Appeal that confirms the narrow scope of protection of lowly distinctive marks.

Intellectual Property

Anna Maria Stein evaluated the survey launched with the goal of assessing the attitudes and beliefs towards IP.

Book Reviews

Jocelyn Bosse reviewed the book Intellectual Property and the Design of Nature (Oxford University Press, 2023) edited by Jose Bellido and Brad Sherman.

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 Friday, December 29, 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.