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

If you've been stretched thin lately and haven't kept up with the IP news, here's the summary of what you missed.

Trade Marks and GIs

This Kat has been stretched thin too.
Image from Pexels.
Marcel Pemsel discussed the latest in plant-based trade marks with the General Court decision that 'MYBACON' (for fungi-based meat substitutes) was of such a nature as to deceive the public. The court was not convinced that consumers would recognise the prefix 'MY' as referring to 'mycelium' and 'myco', a prefix meaning 'fungi'.

Anastasiia Kyrylenko commented on the decision of AFNIC (the French country-code top-level domain name registrar) to transfer '' to the owners of the French geographical indication (GI) ‘Porcelaine de Limoges’, even though the domain name was registered before the GI.

Patents and Plant Varieties

Rose Hughes discussed a recent American case, K-fee v Nespresso.  The case addressed the well-established US principle of file wrapper estoppel and confirmed that prosecution history from other jurisdictions (in this case, the European file history) could be used to narrow the meaning of a term in the patent claims.

This Kat reviewed the decisions from the Italian Corte Suprema di Cassazione last year, which clarified how the IP office should approach the assessment of novelty and distinctness of plant varieties where the application for protection was made after the relevant priority period had expired.


Eleonora Rosati informed readers about the upcoming event on 1 February at Fordham Law School, NYC, entitled 'Transatlantic Dialogue on Copyright and the Court of Justice of the European Union'. There's lots of great speakers on the agenda (including Eleonora Rosati herself). Readers can find details and registration here.

Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week! Reviewed by Jocelyn Bosse on Saturday, January 20, 2024 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.