2026 is well underway. Missed IPKat last week? Here’s your catch‑up:
Copyright
Söğüt Atilla‑Aydın walked us through a recent Ninth Circuit case on tattoos and photographs in which a judicial concern about the intrinsic copyright infringement test has been raised.
Patents and SPCs
Rose Hughes reviewed the G 1/25 referral and the main amicus curiae arguments on whether description adaptation should be mandatory after claim amendments.
Rose also covered a recent referral to the CJEU questioning whether Santen’s first authorisation test applies to SPCs for veterinary products when the active ingredient was previously authorised for human use.
Claire Gregg examined how clinical trial disclosures can affect patent validity in Australia, in light of the recent EPO Board of Appeal decision in T0883/23.
Trade Marks
Marcel Pemsel reported on the CJEU reference MPM-QUALITY (C-693/25), which asks whether the five-year acquiescence period under EU trade mark law stops or restarts when an earlier national mark is wrongfully cancelled and subsequently re-registered, and how this interacts with national limitation periods and prior-user rights.
Artificial Intelligence
Katfriend Natalia Basałaj reviewed the EU’s first draft of the Code of Practice on Transparency of AI-Generated Content, focusing on new rules for labelling AI‑made materials and the plan for a single EU‑wide AI icon.
Katfriend Daan Breuking discussed whether AI-generated output may qualify for copyright or EU design protection, considering the recent CJEU decisions in Mio/konektra and Deity Shoes.
News and Events
Marcel Pemsel informed us about key upcoming events, developments, and news, including a series of IP-focused lectures and webinars, record EUIPO trademark and design filings for 2025, the UKIPO’s 150th anniversary celebrations, and Grenada joining the Madrid Protocol.
 |
| Graphic by Riana Harvey |
Söğüt Atilla‑Aydın walked us through a recent Ninth Circuit case on tattoos and photographs in which a judicial concern about the intrinsic copyright infringement test has been raised.
Patents and SPCs
Rose Hughes reviewed the G 1/25 referral and the main amicus curiae arguments on whether description adaptation should be mandatory after claim amendments.
Rose also covered a recent referral to the CJEU questioning whether Santen’s first authorisation test applies to SPCs for veterinary products when the active ingredient was previously authorised for human use.
Claire Gregg examined how clinical trial disclosures can affect patent validity in Australia, in light of the recent EPO Board of Appeal decision in T0883/23.
Trade Marks
Marcel Pemsel reported on the CJEU reference MPM-QUALITY (C-693/25), which asks whether the five-year acquiescence period under EU trade mark law stops or restarts when an earlier national mark is wrongfully cancelled and subsequently re-registered, and how this interacts with national limitation periods and prior-user rights.
Artificial Intelligence
Katfriend Natalia Basałaj reviewed the EU’s first draft of the Code of Practice on Transparency of AI-Generated Content, focusing on new rules for labelling AI‑made materials and the plan for a single EU‑wide AI icon.
Katfriend Daan Breuking discussed whether AI-generated output may qualify for copyright or EU design protection, considering the recent CJEU decisions in Mio/konektra and Deity Shoes.
News and Events
Marcel Pemsel informed us about key upcoming events, developments, and news, including a series of IP-focused lectures and webinars, record EUIPO trademark and design filings for 2025, the UKIPO’s 150th anniversary celebrations, and Grenada joining the Madrid Protocol.
Never Too Late: If you missed the IPKat last week!
Reviewed by Kliment Markov
on
Wednesday, January 21, 2026
Rating:
Reviewed by Kliment Markov
on
Wednesday, January 21, 2026
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Book Review] Fashion and Intellectual Property](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhb1-j8ab3BkUuYhYwfgFYokPrxBTGFG1wF5KmYJU2k-AoIcYvAv87FMjFBC2hnGMaAFtET0ChRTEfb3we8_3K8vq16aqqecGXElUQuskYCuo0qvc8RWZzASHxAfqkTbcG9omqeIbH1cJCzjMIyf04X56qhlHIVEifmujHSlKITCU6fZFiOYxfdzw=s72-c)
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