| A very busy Kat |
Copyright
Jocelyn Bosse reported on AG Szpunar’s Opinion in Inter IKEA Systems v Vlaams Belang (C-298/23), which analyses “due cause” as the mechanism for balancing trade marks with a reputation against freedom of expression. The Opinion notes that political use may only qualify where it targets the trade mark holder or contributes to a public interest debate, not when it exploits exploiting the mark’s reputation.
Katfriend Simone Driusso reviewed Publishers’ Rights and Copyright Law: Safeguarding Access to Information and Media Pluralism by Michalina Kowala. The book analyses the press publishers’ right under Article 15 of the CDSM Directive and examines its interaction with technological change and market dynamics, providing rich comparative insights into the evolving relationship between press publishers and digital platforms.
Trade Marks
Söğüt Atilla-Aydın reported on the General Court’s recent ruling in Puma v CMS Costruzione macchine speciali SpA, where the assessment of reputation under Article 8(5) EUTMR took centre stage. Let’s just say that Puma took the jump on this one… but whether it lands on its feet remains to be determined.
Oliver Fairhurst reported on the Hague District Court’s judgment in the BMW fire-damaged vehicles case, where exhaustion, transit status and post-incident opportunism collided, proving that sometimes when you try to salvage a deal, you risk getting burned.
Jocelyn Bosse reported on AG Szpunar’s Opinion in Inter IKEA Systems v Vlaams Belang (C-298/23), which analyses “due cause” as the mechanism for balancing trade marks with a reputation against freedom of expression. The Opinion notes that political use may only qualify where it targets the trade mark holder or contributes to a public interest debate, not when it exploits exploiting the mark’s reputation.
Katfriend Simone Driusso reviewed Publishers’ Rights and Copyright Law: Safeguarding Access to Information and Media Pluralism by Michalina Kowala. The book analyses the press publishers’ right under Article 15 of the CDSM Directive and examines its interaction with technological change and market dynamics, providing rich comparative insights into the evolving relationship between press publishers and digital platforms.
Trade Marks
Söğüt Atilla-Aydın reported on the General Court’s recent ruling in Puma v CMS Costruzione macchine speciali SpA, where the assessment of reputation under Article 8(5) EUTMR took centre stage. Let’s just say that Puma took the jump on this one… but whether it lands on its feet remains to be determined.
Oliver Fairhurst reported on the Hague District Court’s judgment in the BMW fire-damaged vehicles case, where exhaustion, transit status and post-incident opportunism collided, proving that sometimes when you try to salvage a deal, you risk getting burned.
Patents
Claire Gregg reported on the Federal Court of Australia’s interlocutory decision in Scidera v Meat and Livestock Australia (No 2), which questioned whether part-performing a diagnostic method outside the jurisdiction is enough to sidestep infringement. Let’s just say that when it comes to cross-border testing, the Court hinted that not everything can be outsourced.
Rose Hughes explored 2025 EPO case law trends on antibodies and biologics, noting how growing scientific complexity is pushing patent law to adapt, particularly in relation to added matter, inventive step and the role of post-published data.
Rose Hughes also examined the first post-G 1/23 application of non-reproducible prior art in T 1044/23, showing that, while such commercial products may now defeat novelty, turning them into a successful inventive step attack remains far trickier when key know-how stays locked behind trade secrets.
Opportunities and Events:
Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo curated a round-up of the latest IP news, events and opportunities, spanning recent AI-related rulings (Getty Images v Stability AI, GEMA v OpenAI), key conferences and fresh EUIPO initiatives.
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Reviewed by Wissam Bentazar
on
Wednesday, November 19, 2025
Rating:


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