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

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

Trade Marks and Designs

Image from Pixabay.
Marcel Pemsel evaluated the ruling of the German Supreme Court concerning the 3D trade mark for Volkswagen's famous 'Bulli' vehicle. A model car manufacturer continued selling Bulli models in packaging stating that they were "officially licenced" after its licence agreement was terminated, but raised questions of "genuine use" of the mark during the infringement proceedings. 

Katfriend Henning Hartwig (Bardehle Pagenberg) reported on the new decision of the EU General Court on the validity of a registered Community design in light of a piece of prior art that only showed a two-dimensional view of the design.


Rose Hughes shared the news of the referral of three questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal on how and if the description should be used to interpret the claims of a patent when assessing patentability.


Antonios Baris discussed the decision in the US case of Griner v. King, which concerned the "success kid" meme. The court held that "the fact that everyone else is doing it is not a particularly compelling justification" for the fair use doctrine under 17 U.S.C. § 107 to apply to the creation and dissemination of a meme on social media.

Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot examined the ruling of the Paris Court of Appeal on the parody exception and freedom of artistic expression, as well as the notion of transformative work. The case concerned the famous character, Tintin, who was depicted in the parodic works of American painter Hopper.

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 Wednesday, July 10, 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.