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

If you were too busy last week to keep up with the IP news, here's the summary of what you missed.

Join Us!

Looking at new opportunities. Image from Pixabay.
Firstly, a reminder that applications are currently open for a new GuestKat and InternKat. The deadline for applying to be a GuestKat and InternKat is Friday, 14 June 2024 (midnight GMT). Successful candidates will start in July 2024. Details here.


This Kat reported on the conclusion of a new treaty, entitled the WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge. When it enters into force, the treaty will create an international disclosure requirement related to genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources in patent applications. 

Rose Hughes discussed  a case that considered the infamous "dynamic interpretation" by the Enlarged Board of Appeal in Pepper (G 3/19) on essentially biological processes. The decision related to a beer comprising a new type of barley, for a flavourful beer (T 0420/19). 

Trade Marks

Marcel Pemsel outlined the legal issues at the heart of a preliminary reference to the CJEU from the French Cour de Cassation (Case C-168/24). The case considers whether, if a fashion designer dies, retires, or leaves the company, the trade mark for the eponymous brand can become deceptive. The facts differ from those in the Emanuel case (C-259/04) in a manner that raises questions about the scope of this absolute ground for refusal. 

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 Monday, May 27, 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.