If you've been too busy enjoying the warmer weather, here's the summary of the IP news you missed this week:
Trade Marks and GIs
 |
| A Kat enjoying the outdoors. Image from Pixabay. |
Marcel Pemsel analysed the decision of the German Patent Court, which refused the registration of a trade mark that comprised a well-known photograph named ‘Sprung in die Freiheit’ (‘Leap into freedom’), showing a young border policeman jumping over a barbed wire fence to escape from East Berlin to West Berlin in 1961. The Court held that the sign lacked distinctiveness, as the photo and its origin are known to the average consumer in Germany and would not be perceived as an indication of commercial origin.
Anna Maria Stein evaluated the EUIPO Board of Appeal decision to refuse Kurt Geiger Limited's application to register a 3D trade mark for jewellery constituted by the representation of a bejewelled eagle head. The shape would not be perceived as a badge of origin since it does not deviate significantly from industry norms, and therefore lacked distinctiveness.
Patents and Trade Secrets
Antonios Baris reviewed the book, Cross-Border Trade Secret Disputes in the European Union - Jurisdiction and Applicable Law, by Lydia Lundstedt (Stockholm University). The book examines the opaque relations between private international law and the EU Trade Secrets Directive in the context of transnational enforcement of trade secrets, ultimately proposing solutions that align with the directive's objectives.
Eleonora Rosati informed readers about the upcoming Life Science Strategy Summit on IP & Exclusivity, which will take place in Munich, Germany, from 8-10 October 2024. The event will involve practical discussion on the protection of pharmaceutical drugs based on patent and regulatory exclusivities. IPKat readers are entitled to a 15% discount in the registration fee using VIP code IPKAT_SM at checkout. You can find the agenda and registration here.
Reviewed by Jocelyn Bosse
on
Monday, June 10, 2024
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
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: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html