If you spent the last week of June enjoying the warmer weather rather than reading the IP news (for this Kat's part, she's been soaking up the Italian sunshine before the ATRIP Conference), here's the summary of what you missed.
Trade Marks
 |
| A Kat taking a break in the Tuscan shade. Photo by Jocelyn Bosse. |
Marcel Pemsel discussed the latest decision from the CJEU in EUIPO v Indo European Foods, which confirmed that the General Court could hear an action that was brought against a decision of the EUIPO Board of Appeal rendered before Brexit took full effect.
Katfriend Eric Möhlenberg (Friedrich Graf von Westphalen) explored the trends in the protection of sound marks in light of the decisions of the EUIPO and CJEU. While the number of applications is increasing, the analysis shows that distinctiveness remains a key difficulty.
Nedim Malovic considered the challenge of distinguishing personal use from use in the course of trade in trade mark infringement proceedings. In a case about the importation of counterfeit goods, the District Court of The Hague confirmed that a natural person who engages in sales which, because of their volume, frequency, or other characteristics, is acting in the course of trade.
Copyright
Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot analysed a recent decision of the Paris Court of Appeal about rights of an author whose photograph was cropped to remove his name. The Court held that there had been an infringement of the author's moral right of attribution, but the slight cropping did not infringe his right of integrity, nor his reproduction rights.
Technology Law
Alessandro Cerri reviewed the book Regulating the Synthetic Society: Generative AI, Legal Questions, and Societal Challenges by Bart van der Sloot (Tilburg University). The book explores the societal challenges raised by AI technology and how it should be regulated, with a particular focus on EU law (including the GDPR and the AI Act).
Reviewed by Jocelyn Bosse
on
Monday, July 01, 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